VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 


VIRGINIA    UNDER    THE 
STUARTS 


1607-1688 


BY 

THOMAS  J.  WERTENBAKER,  Ph.D. 


PRINCETON  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
PRINCETON 

LONDON:  HUMPHREY  MILFORD 

OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

1914. 


f'-p 


Copyright,  1914,  by 
Princeton  University  Press 

Published  February,  1914 


Dedicated 
to  my  mother 


29;5809 


PREFACE 

During  the  past  few  decades  a  flood  of  lig'ht  has  been 
thrown  upon  Virginia  colonial  history.  Many  letters,  reports 
and  other  manuscripts  have  been  unearthed,  and  in  some  cases, 
printed.  Monographs,  editions  of  old  texts,  legislative  jour- 
nals have  been  given  to  the  public.  Investigators  have  studied 
thoroughly  statements  and  conclusions  reiterated  for  centuries, 
and  have  proved  them  erroneous  or  misleading.  What  have 
long  been  considered  the  fundamental  facts  in  the  history  of 
the  establishment  of  the  nation  have  been  attacked  and  over- 
thrown. The  author,  in  the  present  volume,  has  attempted 
to  rewrite  the  political  history  of  Virginia  from  the  found- 
ing of  Jamestown  to  the  English  Revolution  of  1688,  in 
a  form  that  will  make  these  newly  discovered  facts  available 
to  the  general  reader. 

For  the  period  of  the  London  Company  of  Virginia  great 
reliance  has  been  placed  upon  the  works  of  Alexander  Brown. 
Although  not  agreeing  with  all  the  views  of  this  remarkable 
man,  the  author  feels  safe  in  presenting  the  main  facts  of 
early  Virginia  history  in  accordance  with  his  more  impor- 
tant conclusions.  The  chapter  upon  Governor  Harvey  is 
based  almost  entirely  upon  the  original  correspondence  in  the 
British  Public  Record  Office  in  London.  For  the  first  admin- 
istration of  Sir  William  Berkeley  and  for  the  Commonwealth 
period  the  author  has  been  compelled  to  fall  back  upon  the 
sources  preserved  in  Virginia,  notably  Hening's  Statutes  at 
Large.  Unfortunately  the  civil  contest  in  England,  the  over- 
throw of  the  King,  the  hostility  of  the  Virginia  government 
to  Parliament,  the  foreign  wars  of  Oliver  Cromwell  brought 
about  almost  a  total  cessation  of  official  correspondence  be- 
tween the  colony  and  the  mother  country  during  the  years  from 
1642  to  1660.  Consequently  there  is  a  discouraging  dearth  of 
material  among  the  British  records. 

Chapters  V,  VI,  VII  and  VIII  are  based  mainly  upon  origi- 


nal  letters,  journals,  reports  and  entries  preserved  in  England. 
Great  stress  is  placed  upon  the  causes  of  Bacon's  Rebellion, 
and  the  Rebellion  itself  is  treated  in  detail.  The  author  relies,- 
in  his  account  of  the  exciting  incidents  of  this  singular  move- 
ment, largely  upon  the  report  and  letters  of  the  commissioners 
sent  to  Virginia  by  Charles  II  to  ascertain  the  grievances  of 
the  people.  He  realizes,  however,  that  much  of  their  evidence 
is  prejudiced,  and  by  no  means  accepts  without  question  their 
every  statement. 

The  period  from  1677  to  1688  is  one  of  the  most  important 
in  Virginia  history.  During  these  years,  in  Virginia  as  well 
as  in  New  England,  the  fundamental  liberties  of  the  people 
were  threatened  by  the  encroachments  of  the  Crown,  and  were 
saved  only  by  the  heroic  resistance  of  the  House  of  Burgesses. 
Since  these  events  have  been  greatly  neglected  by  historians, 
and  since  abundant  source  material  bearing  upon  them  is 
found  in  the  Public  Record  Office,  the  author  has  attempted 
to  describe  them  in  detail. 

Finally,  it  remains  only  for  the  author  to  express  his 
appreciation  of  the  kindness  of  those  who  have  aided  ,him  in 
his  work.  He  wishes  especially  to  acknowledge  the  assistance 
rendered  by  Professor  Robert  McN.  McElroy  and  Professor 
M.  W.  Croll,  of  Princeton  University;  Professor  Richard 
Heath  Dabney,  of  the  University  of  Virginia;  Dr.  H.  R. 
Mcllwaine,  Virginia  State  Librarian;  and  the  officers  and 
attendants  of  the  British  Public  Record  Office. 

Thomas  J.  Wertenbaker. 
Princeton,  N.  J. 
December  2,  191 3. 


CONTENTS 

Preface vii 

Abbreviations  Used  in  Notes xi 

Chapter  I — The  Founding  of  Virginia i 

Chapter  II' — The  EstabHshment  of  Representative  Gov- 
ernment      29 

Chapter  III — The  Expulsion  of  Sir  John  Harvey 60 

Chapter  IV — Governor  Berkeley  and  the  Commonwealth  85 

Chapter  V — The  Causes  of  Bacon's  Rebellion 115 

Chapter  VI — Bacon's  Rebellion 146 

Chapter  VII — The  Period  of  Confusion 195 

Chapter  VIII— The  Critical  Period 225 

Index   261 


IX 


ABBREVIATIONS  USED  IN  NOTES 

Arb.  Smith,  Works  of  Captain  John  Smith,  Edward  Arber. 
Scobell,  Scobell's  Collection  of  Acts  and  Ordinances  of  General  Use. 
F.  R.,  The  First  Republic  in  America,  Alexander  Brown. 
Gen.,  The  Genesis  of  the  United  States,  Alexander  Brown. 
____^orce.   Tracts  and   Other  Papers  Relating   to   the   Colonies  in  North 

America,  Peter  Force. 
^^...'^ar.  of  Va.,  Narratives  nf  Early  Virginia.  Lyon  G.  Tyler. 
— ^Va.  Car.,  Virginia  Cdrolorum/E.  D.  Neill. 
^..^-Hen.,  The  Statutes  at  Large,  W.  W.  Hening. 

Proceedings    of   Va.    Co.,   Proceedings    of   the    Virginia    Company    of 
London. 
.'^Cradle  of  Rep.,  The  Cradle  of  the  Republic,  Lyon  G.  Tyler. 

Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Institutional  History  of  Virginia  in  the  Seventeenth 
Century,  P.  A.  Bruce. 

Bruce,   Ec.   Hist.,   Economic  History   of   Virginia  in   the   Seventeenth 
Century,  P.  A.  Bruce, 

Miller,  The  Legislature  of  the  Province  of  Virginia,  E.  I.  Miller. 
P.  R.  O.,  British  Public  Record  Office. 
—--Stith,  History  of  Virginia,  William  Stith. 

. ■Osg.,  American  Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  H.  L.  Osgood. 

Neill,  Va.   Co.,  History  of  the   Virginia  Company  of  London,  E.   D. 
Neill. 
Fiske,  Old  Va.,  Old  Virginia  and  her  Neighbors,  John  Fiske. 
Burk,  History  of  Virginia,  John  Burk. 
Va.  Hist.  Reg.,  Virginia  Historical  Register. 
——Beverley,  History  of  Virginia,  Roibert  Beverley. 

Va.  Mag.,  Virginia  Magazine  of  History  and  Biography. 
Wise,  The  Early  History  of  the  Eastern  Shore  of  Virginia,  J.  C.  Wise. 
Southern  Lit.  Mess.,  Southern  Literary  Messenger. 
Campbell,  History  of  Virginia,  Charles  Campbell. 
McD.,  McDonald  Papers,  Virginia  State  Library. 
. — —Jour.  H.  of  B.,  Journals  of  the  House  of  Burgesses.    Manuscript  copies 
in  the  Virginia  State  Library. 
Justice  in  Virginia,  Justice  in  Colonial  Virginia,  O.  P.  Chitwood. 
Sains.,  Sainsbury  Papers,  Virginia  State  Library. 
Mass.  S.  IV.,  Massachusetts  Historical  Collections,  Series  IV. 
-— -"T.  M.,  The  Beginning,  Progress  and  Conclusion  of  Bacon's  Rebellion. 
W.  &  M.  Q.,  William  and  Mary  Quarterly. 
Inds'   Pros.,   Indians'  Proceedings. 
Bac's  Pros.,  Bacon's  Proceedings. 
Ing's  Pros.,  Ingram's  Proceedings. 

Cotton,  Our  Late  Troubles  in  Virginia,  Mrs.  A.  Cotton. 

Va.  Vet.,  Virginia  Vetusta,  E.  D.  Neill. 


CHAPTER  I 
The  Founding  of  Virginia 

In  December,  1606,  three  little  vessels — the  Sarah  Constant, 
the  Discovery  and  the  Goodspeed — set  sail  from  England 
under  Captain  Christopher  Newport,  for  the  distant  shores 
of  Virginia.^  After  a  long  and  dangerous  voyage  across  the 
Atlantic  the  fleet,  on  the  sixth  of  May,  1607,  entered  the 
Chesapeake  Bay.^  The  adventurers  spent  several  days  ex- 
ploring this  great  body  of  water,  landing  parties  to  investigate 
the  nature  of  the  shores,  and  to  visit  the  Indian  tribes  that 
inhabited  them.  They  were  delighted  with  the  "faire  med- 
dowes,  .  .  .  full  of  flowers  of  divers  kinds  and  colours",  and 
with  the  "goodly  tall  trees"  of  the  forests  with  "Fresh-waters 
running"  between,  but  they  had  instructions  not  to  settle  near 
the  coast,  lest  they  should  fall  victims  to  the  Spaniards.^  So 
they  entered  the  broad  mouth  of  a  river  which  they  called  the 
James,  and  made  their  way  cautiously  up  into  the  country. 
On  the  twenty-third  of  May  they  found  a  peninsula  in  the 
river,  which  afforded  a  convenient  landing  place  and  was 
easy  to  defend,  both  from  the  Indians  and  the  Spaniards. 
This  place  they  called  Jamestown.  Landing  their  men,  they 
set  immediately  to  work  building  houses  and  erecting  fortifi- 
cations. Thus  did  the  English  begin  their  first  permanent 
settlement  in  the  New  World. 

The  bold  band  of  adventurers  that  came  thus  hopefully 
into  this  beautiful  and  smiling  country  little  realized  that 
before  them  lay  only  dangers  and  misfortunes.  Could  they 
have  foreseen  the  terrible  obstacles  to  founding  a  colony  in 
this  land,  they  would  have  hesitated  before  entering  upon  the 
enterprise. 

Four  things  conspired  to  bring  misfortune  and  disaster  upon 

*F.  R.,  pp.  21,  22.  *F.  R.,  p.  23. 

*Arb.  Smith,  Ixi-lxii. 

I 


2  ,;,....,..;  .     VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Virginia.  The  form  of  government  prescribed  by  the  King 
and  the  Company  was  unsuited  to  the  infant  settlement,  and 
its  defects  kept  the  colonists  for  many  months  in  turmoil  and 
disorder.  The  Indians  proved  a  constant  source  of  danger, 
for  they  were  tireless  in  cutting  off  stragglers,  ambushing 
small  parties  and  in  destroying  the  crops  of  the  white  men. 
Famines  came  at  frequent  intervals  to  weaken  the  colonists 
and  add  to  their  misfortunes.  But  by  far  the  most 
terrible  scourge  was  the  "sicknesse"  that  swept  over  Vir- 
ginia year  after  year,  leaving  in  its  wake  horrible  suffering 
and  devastation. 

The  charter  that  James  I  granted  to  the  London  Company 
served  as  a  constitution  for  Virginia,  for  it  prescribed  the 
form  of  government  and  made  regulations  that  none  could 
disregard.  It  provided  for  a  Council,  resident  in  England,  to 
wliich  was  assigned  the  management  of  the  colony  and  the 
supervision  of  its  government.*  This  body  was  appointed  by 
the  King  and  was  strictly  answerable  to  him  through  the 
Privy  Council  for  its  every  act.^  The  immediate  government 
of  the  colony  was  entrusted  to  a  local  Council,  selected  by  the 
Council  in  England,  and  responsible  to  it.  The  Virginia 
Council  exercised  extraordinary  powers,  assuming  all  adminis- 
trative, legislative  and  judicial  functions,  and  being  in  no 
way  restrained  by  the  wishes  or  demands  of  their  fellow 
colonists.^  Although  they  were  restricted  by  the  charter  and 
by  the  instructions  of  the  Council  in  England,  the  isolation  of 
the  settlement  and  the  turbulent  spirit  of  the  adventurers  made 
them  reckless  in  enforcing  their  own  will  upon  the  colonists. 
More  than  once  they  were  guilty  of  unpardonable  harshness 
and  cruelty. 

The  charter  did  not  provide  for  the  appointment  of  a 
Governor.  The  nominal  leadership  of  the  colony  was  en- 
trusted to  a  President,  chosen  by  the  local  Council  from  among 
its  members.  This  officer  had  no  duty  distinct  from  that  of 
the  Councillors,  other  than  to  preside  at  their  meetings  and 
to  cast  a  double  or  deciding  vote  in  case  of  deadlock.'^     He 

*Gen.,  p.  55.  "Gen.,  p.  56 

•  Gen.,  pp.  55,  70,  Ti.  '  Gen.,  p.  T]. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  3 

was  to  serve  but  one  year  and  if  at  any  time  his  administration 
proved  unsatisfactory  to  his  colleagues,  they  could,  by  a  major- 
ity vote,  depose  him.  In  like  manner,  any  Councillor  that  had 
become  obnoxious  could  be  expelled  without  specific  charges 
and  without  trial. ^  These  unwise  provisions  led  naturally  to 
disorder  and  strife,  and  added  much  to  the  misfortunes  of  the 
infant  colony.^ 

The  selections  for  the  Council  were  made  some  days  before 
the  fleet  sailed,  but  the  Company,  fearing  a  conflict  of  author- 
ity during  the  voyage,  thought  it  best  that  they  should  be  kept 
secret  until  the  colonists  had  reached  Virginia.  The  names 
of  the  appointees  were  embodied  in  "several  instruments" 
which  were  entrusted  to  the  commanders  of  the  vessels,  with 
instructions  that  they  should  be  opened  within  twenty-four 
hours  after  they  had  arrived  off  the  coast  of  America. ^°  Upon 
entering  the  Chesapeake  Bay  the  adventurers  read  the  papers, 
and  found  that  Christopher  Newport,  the  commander  of  the 
fleet,  Edward  Wingfield,  Bartholomew  Gosnold,  George 
Kendall,  John  Ratcliffe,  John  Martin  and  John  Smith  were 
those  that  had  been  chosen.  ^^ 

After  the  landing  the  Council  met,  were  sworn  to  office,  and 
then  elected  Wingfield  President. ^^  Captain  John  Smith, 
who  had  been  accused  of  mutiny  during  the  voyage,  was  not 
allowed  to  take  his  seat,  and  was  kept  under  restraint  until  the 
twentieth  of  June.^^ 

Hardly  had  the  founding  of  Jamestown  been  effected  when 
the  weakness  of  the  constitution  became  apparent.  The  meet- 
ings of  the  Council  were  discordant  and  stormy.     The  mem- 

*Gen.,  p.  67.  'Gen.,  pp.  342,  411. 

"Gen.,  p.  7T.  ^Arb.   Smith,  p.  91. 

"Arb.  Smith,  p.  91. 

"Arb.  Smith,  p.  91;  F.  R.,  pp.  27,  32.  Smith  denied  the  justice  of 
these  charges.  "Now  Captaine  Smith,  who  all  this  time  from  their 
departure  from  the  Canaries,  was  restrained  as  a  prisoner,  upon  the 
scandalous  suggestions  of  some  of  the  chiefe  (envying  his  repute)  ;  who 
fained  he  intended  to  ursurpe  the  government,  murder  the  Councell, 
and  make  himself  king;  that  his  confederats  were  dispearsed  in  all 
the  three  ships,  and  that  divers  of  his  confederats  that  revealed  it,  would 
affirme  it :  for  this  he  was  committed."    Arb.  Smith,  p.  92. 


# 


4  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

bers  were  utterly  unable  to  act  with  vigor  and  determination, 
or  to  agree  upon  any  settled  course  of  action  in  establishing 
the  little  colony.  The  President,  because  of  the  limitation 
of  his  powers,  could  do  nothing  to  restore  harmony  or  to 
enforce  his  own  wishes  and  policies.  Confusion  and  misman- 
agement resulted.  In  less  than  a  month  after  the  first  landing 
the  inefficiency  of  the  government  had  created  such  discontent 
that  the  colonists  petitioned  the  Council  for  redress.^*  It 
was  only  the  tact  and  moderation  of  Captain  Newport  that 
appeased  the  anger  of  the  settlers  and  persuaded  them  to 
submit  to  the  decrees  of  the  governing  body.^^ 

On  the  second  of  July,  Newport,  with  his  little  fleet,  sailed 
for  England,  leaving  the  ill-fated  colonists  to  their  own 
resources. ^^  No  sooner  had  he  gone  than  the  spirit  of  discord 
reappeared.  The  quarrels  within  the  Council  became  more 
violent  than  ever,  and  soon  resulted  in  the  complete  disrup- 
tion of  that  body.  Captain  Kendall,  who  seems  to  have  been 
active  in  fomenting  ill  feeling  among  his  colleagues,  was  the 
first  to  be  expelled.  Upon  the  charge  of  exciting  discord  he 
was  deprived  of  his  seat  and  committed  to  prison.  ^'^ 

As  Captain  John  Smith  had,  before  the  departure  of  New- 
port, been  allowed  to  take  his  place  in  the  Council,  there  were 
now  five  members  of  that  body.  The  number  was  soon  re- 
duced to  four  by  the  death  of  Captain  Gosnold,  who  fell  a 
victim  to  the  sickness.^®  One  would  imagine  that  the  Council, 
thus  depleted,  would  have  succeeded  in  governing  the  colony 
in  peace,  but  the  settlers  were  given  no  respite  from  their 
wrangling  and  disputes.  In  September,  Ratcliffe,  Smith  and 
Martin  entered  into  an  agreement  to  depose  President  Wing- 
field  and  to  oust  him  from  the  Council.  Before  they  pro- 
ceeded against  him,  however,  they  pledged  each  other  that  the 
expulsions  should  then  stop,  and  that  no  one  of  the  three  should 
be  attacked  by  the  other  two. 

The  Councillors  then  appeared  before  Wingfield's  tent  with 
a  warrant,    "subscribed   imder  their  handes,   to  depose   the 

"Arb.  Smith,  liii.  "Arb.  Smith,  liv. 

"F.  R.,  p.  39.  "Arb.  Smith,  Ixxvii. 

"Arb.    Smith,   Ixxvi. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  5 

President;  sayeing  they  thought  him  very  unworthy  to  be 
eyther  President  or  of  the  Councell,  and  therefore  discharged 
him  of  both".^^  They  accused  him  of  misappropriating  funds, 
of  improper  division  of  the  pubHc  stores,  of  being  an  atheist, 
of  plotting  to  desert  Virginia  in  the  pinnace  left  at  James- 
town by  Captain  Newport,  of  combining  with  the  Spaniards 
for  the  destruction  of  the  colony.  Wingfield,  when  he  returned 
to  England,  made  a  vigorous  defense  of  his  conduct,  but  it  is 
now  impossible  to  determine  whether  or  not  he  was  justly 
accused.  After  his  expulsion  from  office,  he  was  summoned 
before  the  court  by  the  remnant  of  the  Council  to  answer  these 
numerous  charges.  It  might  have  gone  hard  with  him,  had 
he  not  demanded  a  hearing  before  the  King.  As  his  enemies 
feared  to  deny  him  this  privilege,  they  closed  the  court,  and 
committed  him  to  prison  on  board  the  pinnace,  where  he 
was  kept  until  means  were  at  hand  to  send  him  to  England. 2*^ 

The  removal  of  the  President  did  not  bring  peace  to  the 
colony.  If  we  may  believe  the  testimony  of  Wingfield,  the 
triumvirate  that  now  held  sway  ruled  the  settlers  with  a  harsh 
and  odious  tyranny.  "Wear,"  he  says,  "this  whipping,  lawing, 
beating,  and  hanging,  in  Virginia,  known  in  England,  I  fear 
it  would  drive  many  well  affected  myndes  from  this  honour- 
able action. "2^  One  day  Ratcliffe,  who  had  been  chosen  to 
succeed  Wingfield,  became  embroiled  with  James  Read,  the 
smith.  Read  forgot  the  respect  due  his  superior,  and  struck 
the  new  President.  So  heinous  a  crime  was  this  affront  to 
the  dignity  of  the  chief  officer  of  the  infant  colony,  that  the 
smith  was  brought  to  trial,  convicted  and  sentenced  to  be 
hanged.  But  he  saved  his  life,  upon  the  very  eve  of  his  execu- 
tion, by  revealing  to  Ratcliffe  a  plot  against  the  government, 
headed,  he  declared,  by  Captain  Kendall.^^  Immediately 
Kendall,  who  had  long  been  an  object  of  suspicion,  was  tried 
for  mutiny,  found  guilty  and  executed. ^^ 

In  December,  1607,  when  the  colony  was  suffering  severely 
for  the  want  of  food.  Captain  Smith  led  an  expedition  into  the 

"  Arb.  Smith,  Ixxix.  *  Anb.    Smith,   Ixxxi, 

""Arb.  Smith,  Ixxxiv.  ''Arb.   Smith,  Ixxxiv. 

""Arb.  Smith,  Ixxxv. 


6  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

territory  of  the  Chickahominies  in  quest  of  corn.^'*  During 
his  absence  the  President,  despite  the  protests  of  Martin, 
admitted  Captain  Gabriel  Archer  to  the  Council. ^^  Archer, 
who  seems  to  have  been  a  bitter  enemy  of  Smith,  had  no 
sooner  attained  this  place  of  power,  than  he  set  to  work  to 
ruin  the  adventurous  captain.  "Being  settled  in  his  author- 
ity", he  "sought  to  call  Master  Smythes  lief  in  question, 
and  .  .  .  indicted  him  upon  a  Chapter  in  Leviticus  for  the 
death"  of  two  men  under  his  charge,  that  had  been  murdered 
by  the  Indians.  He  was  to  have  had  his  trial  upon  the  very 
day  of  his  return  from  his  thrilling  adventures  with  the 
savages.  His  conviction  and  immediate  execution  would 
doubtless  have  resulted,  had  not  the  proceedings  against  him 
been  interrupted  by  the  arrival  of  the  First  Supply  from  Eng- 
land. ^^  Captain  Newport,  whose  influence  seems  always  to 
have  been  exerted  in  favor  of  moderation  and  harmony,  per- 
suaded the  Council  to  drop  the  charges  against  Smith,  to 
release  him  from  restraint,  and  to  restore  him  to  his  seat  in 
the  Council. 

Of  extraordinary  interest  is  the  assertion  of  Wingfield  that 
the  arrival  of  the  fleet  "prevented  a  Parliament,  which  ye 
newe  Counsailour  (Archer)  intended  thear  to  summon".^'' 
It  is  not  surprising  that  the  settlers,  disgusted  as  they  were 
with  the  violence  and  harshness  of  their  rulers,  should  have 
wished  to  share  in  the  government.  But  we  cannot  but  wonder 
at  their  boldness  in  attempting  to  set  aside  the  constitution 
given  them  by  the  King  and  the  Company.  Had  they  suc- 
ceeded in  establishing  direct  government  by  the  people,  it 
could  not  be  supposed  that  James  would  have  permitted  it  to 
continue.  But  the  attempt  is  very  significant,  as  indicating 
that  they  were  desirous,  even  at  this  early  date,  of  having  a 
voice  in  the  management  of  affairs. 

Archer  and  the  unfortunate  Wingfield  sailed  with  the  fleet 
when  Captain  Newport  returned  to  England,  and  a  few 
months  later  Martin  followed  them.^®     Since,  with  the  First 

**Arb.  Smith,  Ixxxv.  =*F.  R.,  p.  54. 

"Arb.  Smith,  Ixxxvi.  "^Arb.  Smith,  Ixxxvi. 

"F.  R.,  p.  S8. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  7 

Supply  had  come  a  new  Councillor,  Matthew  Scrivener,  the 
governing  body  once  more  numbered  three. 

During  the  summer  of  1608  Smith  was  frequently  away, 
chasing  the  phantom  of  the  passage  to  the  South  Sea,  but  this 
did  not  prevent  the  usual  quarrels.  If  we  may  believe  the 
account  in  Smith's  history,  Ratcliffe  was  deposed  from  the 
Presidency  because  of  "pride  and  unreasonable  needlesse 
cruelty"  and  for  wasting  the  public  stores.^^  It  is  probable 
that  for  some  weeks  Scrivener  conducted  the  government, 
while  Ratcliffe  was  kept  a  prisoner.^*^  In  September,  Captain 
Smith,  returning  from  a  voyage  in  the  Chesapeake  Bay,  "re- 
ceived the  letters  patents,  and  took  upon  him  the  place  of 
president". ^^ 

Smith  was  now  supreme  in  the  government,  for  the  Council 
was  reduced  to  two,  and  his  casting  vote  made  his  will  superior 
to  that  of  Scrivener.  But  he  was  not  long  to  enjoy  this 
power.  In  October,  1608,  Captain  Newport,  arriving  with 
the  Second  Supply,  broug*ht  with  him  two  "antient  souldiers 
and  valient  gentlemen" — Richard  Waldo  and  Peter  Wynne — 
both  bearing  commissions  as  Councillors.^^  Soon  afterward 
Ratcliffe  was  restored  to  his  seat.  The  Council,  thus  recruited, 
resumed  its  control  over  the  colony,  "so  that  although  Smith 
was  President  yet  the  Council  had  the  authority,  and  ruled  it 
as  they  listed". ^^ 

Two  months  later,  when  Newport  sailed  again,  Ratcliffe 
returned  to  England.  Smith  wrote  the  English  Council, 
"Captaine  Ratcliffe  is  ...  a  poore  counterfeited  Imposture. 
I  have  sent  you  him  home,  least  the  company  should  cut  his 
throat."^^  The  next  spring  Waldo  and  Scrivener,  with  nine 
others,  were  caug'ht  in  a  small  boat  upon  the  James  by  a 
violent  gale,  and  were  drowned. ^^  As  Captain  Wynne  soon 
succumbed  to  the  sickness,  Smith  became  the  sole  surviving" 
Councillor.^*^  During  the  summer  of  1609  the  colony  was 
governed,  not,  as  the  King  and  Company  had  designed,  by  a 
Council,  but  by  the  will  of  this  one  man. 

**Arb.  Smith,  pp.  114,  115.  ""Arb.  Smith,  p.  119. 

"^Arb.  Smith,  p.  121;  F.  R.,  p.  61.      ^  F.  R.,  p.  68;  Arb.  Smith,  p.  122. 

'^Arb.  Smith,  p.  122.  '^Arb.  Smith.,  p.  444. 

''F.  R.,  70.  "  F.  R.,  71. 


8  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

In  the  meanwhile  the  London  Company  was  becoming 
aware  that  a  mistake  had  been  made  in  entrusting  the  govern- 
ment of  the  colony  to  a  body  of  Councillors.  The  reports  of 
Wingfield,  Archer,  Newport  and  Ratcliffe  made  it  evident 
that  the  lack  of  harmony  in  the  Council  had  been  a  serious 
hindrance  to  the  success  of  the  enterprise. ^''^  Feeling,  there- 
fore, that  this  "error  in  the  equality  of  the  governors  .  .  . 
had  a  little  shaken  so  tender  a  body",  the  managers  held  an 
especial  meeting  to  effect  a  dhange.^^  A  new  charter  was 
drawn  up  by  Sir  Edwin  Sandys,  approved  by  the  Company  and 
assented  to  by  the  King. 

In  this  document  James  relinquished  intx>  the  hands  of  the 
Company  not  only  the  direct  management  of  the  colony,  but 
the  power  of  drawing  up  a  new  and  more  satisfactory  sys- 
tem of  government.  Acting  under  this  authority,  Sandys  and 
his  associates  abolished  the  Council  and  entrusted  the  entire 
control  of  the  colony  to  an  all-powerful  Governor.  The  dis- 
order that  had  so  impeded  the  success  of  the  enterprise  was 
to  be  crushed  under  the  iron  hand  of  a  despot.  Doubtless 
Sandys  would  have  attempted  to  establish  representative  gov- 
ernment at  once  in  Virginia,  had  conditions  favored  so  radical 
a  change.  But  the  colony  was  too  young  and  feeble,  and 
James  could  hardly  be  expected  to  give  his  consent.  Yet  the 
many  liberal  members  of  the  Company  were  deeply  interested 
in  Virginia  and  were  determined,  should  a  favorable  oppor- 
tunity occur,  to  establish  there  an  Assembly  similar  in  char- 
acter to  the  English  Parliament. 

The  granting  of  the  new  charter  aroused  extraordinary 
interest  in  the  fortunes  of  the  colony  throughout  England 
and  stimulated  the  Company  to  renewed  efforts.  ^^  Thousands 
of  pounds  were  contributed  to  defray  the  expenses  of  another 
expedition,  and  hundreds  of  persons  responded  to  the  appeals 
for  settlers.  The  first  Governor  was  a  man  of  ability  and 
distinction' — Thomas  Lord  De  la  Warr.  Sir  Thomas  Gates 
was  made  Lieutenant-Governor,  George  Summers,  Admiral, 
and  Captain  Newport,  Vice-Admiral.^^    De  la  Warr  found  it 

"F.R.,  p.  73.  "F.R.,  p.  73. 

"P.  R.,  p.  8o.  ■"?.  R.,  p.  84. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  9 

impossible  to  leave  at  once  to  assume  control  of  his  govern- 
ment, but  the  other  officers,  with  nine  vessels  and  no  less  than 
five  hundred  colonists,  sailed  in  June,  1609.*^  Unfortunately, 
in  crossing  the  Gulf  of  Bahama,  the  fleet  encountered  a 
terrific  storm,  which  scattered  the  vessels  in  all  directions. 
When  the  tempest  abated,  several  of  the  ships  reunited  and 
continued  on  their  way  to  Jamestown,  but  the  Sea  Adventure,  ^ 
which  carried  Gates,  Summers  and  Newport,  was  wrecked 
upon  an  island  in  the  Bermudas. ^^  As  a  result  of  this  mis- 
fortune none  of  the  leaders  of  the  expedition  reached  Virginia 
until  May,  1610,  ten  months  later. 

The  other  vessels,  with  most  of  the  settlers,  arrived  at 
Jamestown  in  August,  1609.  The  newcomers  told  CaptairTl 
Smith  of  the  Company's  new  plan  of  government,  and  re- 
quested him  to  relinquish  the  old  commission.  This  the 
President  refused  to  do.  All  the  official  papers  relating  to 
the  change  had  been  aboard  the  Sea  Adventure,  and  he  would 
not  resign  until  he  had  seen  them.^*  A  long  and  heated  con- 
troversy followed,  but  in  the  end  Smith  gained  his  point.^^y 
It  was  agreed  that  until  the  arrival  of  the  Sea  Adventure  the 
colony  should  remain  under  the  old  charter,  and  that  Smith 
should  continue  to  act  as  President  until  the  twentieth  of 
September,  when  he  was  to  relinquish  the  government  to 
Captain  Francis  West.^'' 

This  arrangement  did  not  restore  harmony.  West  felt 
aggrieved  that  Captain  Smith  should  insist  upon  continuing 
the  old  order  of  affairs  despite  the  known  wishes  of  the  Com- 
pany, and  took  occasion  to  ignore  and  slight  his  authority. 
This  so  angered  the  President  that  he  is  said  to  have  plotted 
with  the  Indians  to  surprise  and  cut  off  a  party  of  men  that 
his  rival  was  leading  up  the  James.  Before  this  could  be 
accomplished,  however.  Smith  met  with  a  serious  accident, 
which  led  to  his  immediate  overthrow.  "Sleeping  in  his 
Boate  .  .  .  accidentallie,  one  fired  his  powder-bag,  which  tore 
the  flesh  ...  in  a  most  pittifull  manner;  but  to  quench  the 

«  F.  R..  p.  84. 

""Gen.,  pp.  1329,  1330,  346,  400;  Force,  III;  Arb.  Smith,  p.  635. 
**  F.  R.,  p.  93.  ■"  Gen.,  pp.  331,  347. 

*'Gen.,  pp.  331,  332;  F.  R.,  p.  98. 


10  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

tormenting  fire  ...  he  leaped  over-board  into  the  deepe 
river,  where  ever  they  could  recover  him  he  was  neere 
drowned."*"  Three  former  Councillors — Ratcliffe,  Archer 
and  Martin — who  had  come  over  with  the  new  fleet,  availed 
themselves  of  the  helplessness  of  their  old  foe  to  rid  the 
colony  of  his  presence.  Claiming,  with  some  justice,  that  if 
Smith  could  retain  his  office  under  the  old  charter,  they  were 
by  the  same  power  still  members  of  the  Council,  they  held  a 
meeting,  deposed  him  from  the  Presidency  and  sent  him  back 
to  England. ^^  Having  thus  disposed  of  the  troublesome  Cap- 
tain, they  looked  about  them  for  some  man  suitable  to  head 
the  colony  until  the  arrival  of  Gates.  Neglecting  the  claims 
of  West,  whom  they  probably  considered  too  inexperienced 
for  the  place,  they  selected  Captain  George  Percy.**' 

In  the  meanwhile,  the  crew  and  passengers  of  the  Sea  Ad- 
venture were  stranded  in  the  Bermudas,  upon  what  was  called 
Devil's  Island.  Some  of  their  number  were  daring  enough  to 
venture  out  into  the  ocean  in  the  longboat,  in  an  attempt  to 
reach  the  colony,  but  they  must  have  perished,  for  they  were 
never  heard  from  again.*®  The  rest  of  the  company,  seeing 
no  other  way  of  escape,  built  two  pinnaces  and,  in  May,  1610, 
sailed  away  in  them  for  Jamestown.  A  few  days  later,  upon 
their  arrival  in  Virginia,  Gates  received  the  old  patent  and 
the  seal  from  the  President  and  the  period  of  the  first  royal 
government  in  Virginia  came  to  an  end.^^ 

But  the  "faction  breeding"  government  by  the  Council  was 
by  no  means  the  only  cause  of  trouble.  Far  more  disastrous 
was  the  "sicknesse".  When  the  first  expedition  sailed  for 
Virginia,  the  Council  in  England,  solicitous  for  the  welfare 
of  the  emigrants,  commanded  them  to  avoid,  in  the  choice  of 
a  site  for  their  town,  all  "low  and  moist  places".^  ^  Well 
would  it  have  been  for  the  colonists  had  they  obeyed  these 

^Art>.  Smith,  p.  484. 

**  Ratcliffe  wrote  the  Earl  of  Salisbury,  "This  man  is  sent  home  to 
answere  some  misdemenors,  whereof  I  perswade  me  he  can  scarcely 
clear  himselfe  from  great  imputation  of  blame."    Gen.,  p.  334. 

"F.  R.,  p.  108.  -F.  R.,  p.  115. 

"F.  R.,  p.  117.  "Gen.,  p.  84. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  ii 

instructions.  Captain  Smith  says  there  was  in  fact  opposition 
on  the  part  of  some  of  the  leaders  to  the  selection  of  the 
Jamestown  peninsula,  and  it  was  amply  justified  by  the  event. 
The  place  was  low  and  marshy  and  extremely  unhealthful.^^ 
In  the  summer  months  great  swarms  of  mosquitoes  arose 
from  the  stagnant  pools  of  water  to  attack  the  immigrants 
with  a  sting  more  deadly  than  that  of  the  Indian  arrow  or  the 
Spanish  musket  ball. 

Scarcely  three  months  had  elapsed  from  the  first  landing 
when  sickness  and  death  made  their  appearance.  The 
settlers,  ignorant  of  the  use  of  Peruvian  bark  and  other 
remedies,  were  powerless  to  resist  the  progress  of  the  epidemic. 
Captain  George  Percy  describes  in  vivid  colors  the  sufferings 
of  the  first  terrible  summer.  "There  were  never  Englishmen," 
he  says,  "left  in  a  forreign  country  in  such  miserie  as  wee 
were  in  this  new  discouvered  Virginia.  Wee  watched  every 
three  nights,  lying  on  the  bare-ground,  what  weather  soever 
came;  .  .  .  which  brought  our  men  to  bee  most  feeble 
wretches.  ...  If  there  were  any  conscience  in  men,  it  would 
make  their  harts  to  bleed  to  heare  the  pitifull  murmurings  and 
outcries  of  our  sick  men  without  reliefe,  every  night  and  day 
for  the  space  of  sixe  weekes ;  in  the  morning  their  bodies  being 
trailed  out  of  their  cabines  like  Dogges,  to  be  buried. "^^  So 
deadly  was  the  epidemic  that  when  Captain  Newport  brought 
relief  in  January,  1608,  he  found  but  thirty-eight  of  the 
colonists  alive.^^ 

Nor  did  the  men  that  followed  in  the  wake  of  the  Sarah 
Constant,  the  Discovery  and  the  Goodspeed  fare  better.  In 
the  summer  of  1608,  the  sickness  reappeared  and  once  more 
wrought  havoc  among  the  unhappy  settlers.  Captain  Smith, 
who  probably  saved  his  own  life  by  his  frequent  exploring 
expeditions,  on  his  return  to  Jamestown  in  July,  "found  the 
Last  Supply  al  sicke".^^  In  1609,  when  the  fleet  of  Summers 
and  Newport  reached  Virginia,  the  newcomers,  many  of  whom 
were  already  in  ill  health,  fell  easy  victims  to  malaria  and 
dysentery.     Smith  declared  that  before  the  end  of  1610  "not 

"Arb.  Smith,  p.  5.  ""Arb.  Smith,  Ixxii. 

•*  F.  R.,  p.  55.  ■"  Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  146. 


12  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

past  sixtie  men,  women  and  children"  were  left  of  several 
hundred  that  but  a  few  months  before  had  sailed  away  from 
Plymouth.^®  During  the  short  stay  of  Governor  De  la  Warr 
one  hundred  and  fifty,  or  more  than  half  the  settlers  lost  their 
lives.'^'^ 

Various  visitors  to  Virginia  during  the  early  years  of  the 
seventeenth  century  bear  testimony  to  the  ravages  of  this 
scourge.  A  Spaniard  named  Molina,  writing  in  1613,  declared 
that  one  hundred  and  fifty  out  of  every  three  hundred  colonists 
died  before  being  in  Virginia  twelve  months.^^  DeVries,  a 
Dutch  trader  to  the  colony,  wrote,  "During  the  months  of 
June,  July  and  August  it  is  very  unhealthy,  then  people  that 
have  lately  arrived  from  England,  die,  during  these  months, 
like  cats  and  dogs,  whence  they  call  it  the  sickly  season."^® 
This  testimony  is  corroborated  by  Governor  William  Berkeley, 
who  reported  in  1671,  "There  is  not  now  oft  seasoned  hands 
(as  we  term  them)  that  die  now,  whereas  heretofore  not  one 
of  five  escaped  the  first  year,"^^ 

In  1623  a  certain  Nathaniel  Butler,  in  an  attack  upon  the 
London  Company,  called  "The  Unmasked  Face  of  our  Col- 
ony in  Virginia",  drew  a  vivid,  though  perhaps  an  exag- 
gerated picture  of  the  unhealthfulness  of  the  climate.  "I 
found  the  plantations,"  he  said,  "generally  seated  upon  meer 
salt  marshes,  full  of  infectious  bogs  and  muddy  creeks  and 
lakes,  and  thereby  subjected  to  all  those  inconveniences  and 
diseases  which  are  so  commonly  found  in  the  most  unsound 
and  most  unhealthy  parts  of  England,  whereof  every  country 
and  climate  hath  some."  It  was  by  no  means  uncommon,  he 
declared,  to  see  immigrants  from  England  "Dying  under 
hedges  and  in  the  woods",  and  unless  something  were  done  at 
once  to  arrest  the  frightful  mortality  Virginia  would  shortly 
get  the  name  of  a  slaughter  house. ^^ 

The  climate  of  eastern  Virginia,  unhealthful  as  it  undoubt- 
edly was  in  the  places  where  the  first  settlements  were  made, 

°*  Many  of  these,  however,   died  of  starvation  or  were  killed  by  the 
Indians.     Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  260. 
"Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  212.  "Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  220;  Gen.,  p.  648. 

"  Va.  Car.  *  Hen.,  Vol.  I ;  Gen.,  p.  499. 

"Proceedings  of  Va.  G5.,  p.  171. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  13 

cannot  be  blamed  for  all  the  epidemics  that  swept  the  colony. 
Much  of  the  ill  health  of  the  immigrants  was  due  to  unwhole- 
some conditions  on  board  the  ships  which  brought  them  from 
England.  The  vessels  were  usually  crowded  far  beyond  their 
real  capacity  with  wretched  men,  women  and  children,  and 
were  foul  beyond  description.®^  Not  infrequently  great  num- 
bers died  at  sea.  One  vessel  is  reported  to  have  lost  a  hundred 
and  thirty  persons  out  of  a  hundred  and  eighty-five.  On  the 
ships  that  left  England  in  June,  1609,  both  yellow  fever  and 
the  London  plague  appeared,  doing  fearful  havoc,  and  making 
it  necessary  to  throw  overboard  from  two  of  the  vessels  alone 
thirty-two  unfortunate  wretches.®^  The  diseases  thus  started, 
often  spread  after  the  settlers  had  reached  their  new  homes, 
and  under  favoring  conditions,  developed  into  terrible 
epidemics.®^ 

Less  deadly  than  the  "sicknesse",  but  still  greatly  to  be 
dreaded,  was  the  hostility  of  the  Indians.®^  The  natives,  re- 
sentful at  the  attempt  of  the  white  men  to  establish  themselves 
in  their  midst,  proved  a  constant  menace  to  the  colony.  Their 
superstitious  awe  of  the  strange  newcomers,  and  their  lack  of 
effective  weapons  alone  prevented  untiring  and  open  war. 
Jamestown  was  but  a  few  days  old  when  it  was  subjected  to 
a  violent  assault  by  the  savages.  On  the  twentieth  day  of 
May,  1607,  the  colonists,  while  at  work  without  their  arms  in 
the  fields,  were  attacked  by  several  hundred  Indians.  In  wild 
dismay  they  rushed  into  the  fort,  while  the  savages  followed 
at  their  heels.  "They  came  up  allmost  into  the  ffort,  shot 
through  the  tents,  appeared  in  this  Skirmishe  (which  lasted 
hott  about  an  hower)  a  very  valient  people."  The  guns  of  the 
ships  came  to  the  aid  of  the  English  and  their  thunders  struck 
dismay  into  the  hearts  of  the  savages.  Yet  they  retired  with- 
out panic,  taking  with  them  their  dead  and  wounded.  Four 
of  the  Council,  standing  in  the  front  ranks,  were  wounded  by 
the  natives,  and  President  Wingfield,  while  fighting  valiently, 
had  an  arrow  shot  through  his  beard,  "yet  scaped  hurte".^® 

"  Gen.,  p.  489.  "  Gen.,  p.  329. 

"  F.  R.,  p.  98.        .  ^  "  Gen.,  p.  503. 

••Arb.  Smith,  Hi. 


14  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

A  few  days  after  this  event  a  gentleman  named  Clovell  came 
running  into  the  fort  with  six  arrows  sticking  in  him, 
crying,  "Arm,  arm".  He  had  wandered  too  far  from  the 
town,  and  the  Indians,  who  were  still  prowling  near,  shot  him 
from  ambush.  Eight  days  later  he  died.^^  Thus  at  the  very 
outset,  the  English  learned  the  nature  of  the  conflict  which 
they  must  wage  against  the  Indians.  In  open  fight  the  savages, 
with  their  primitive  weapons,  were  no  match  for  them,  but 
woe  to  any  of  their  number  that  strayed  far  from  the  fort, 
or  ventured  into  the  long  grass  of  the  mainland.  So  fre- 
quently were  small  parties  cut  off,  that  it  became  unsafe  for 
the  English  to  leave  their  settlements  except  in  bodies  large 
enough  to  repel  any  attack. ^^ 

The  epidemics  and  the  wars  with  the  Indians  conspired  to 
bring  upon  the  colony  still  another  horrible  scourge.  The 
constant  dread  of  attack  in  the  fields  and  the  almost  universal 
sickness  made  it  impossible  for  the  settlers  to  raise  crops  suffi- 
cient for  their  needs.  During  the  summer  of  1607  there  were 
at  one  time  scarce  five  able  men  at  Jamestown,  and  these  found 
it  beyond  their  power  even  to  nurse  the  sick  and  bury  the 
dead.  And  in  later  years,  when  corn  was  planted  in  abundance, 
the  stealthy  savages  often  succeeded  in  cutting  it  down  before 
it  could  be  harvested.  There  can  be  no  surprise  then  that 
famines  came  at  frequent  intervals  to  add  to  the  misery  of  the 
ill-fated  colonists.  The  most  terrible  of  these  visited  Virginia 
in  the  winter  of  1609-10.  Smith's  Historic  gives  a  graphic 
account  of  the  suffering  during  those  fearful  months.  Those 
that  escaped  starvation  were  preserved,  it  says,  "for  the  most 
part,  by  roots,  herbes,  acornes,  walnuts,  berries,  now  and  then 
a  fish :  they  that  had  starch  in  these  extremities,  made  no  small 
use  of  it;  yea,  even  the  very  skinnes  of  our  horses.  Nay,  so 
great  was  our  famine,  that  a  Salvage  we  slew  and  buried,  the 
poorer  sort  took  him  up  againe  and  eat  him ;  and  so  did  divers 
one  another  boyled  and  stewed  with  roots  and  herbs :  And 
one  amongst  the  rest  did  kill  his  wife,  powdered  her,  and 
had  eaten  part  of  her  before  it  was  knowne ;  for  which  hee  was 

"Arb.  Smith,  liii. 

"Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  I,  p.  17;  Gen.,  p.  405,  419,  456. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  iS 

executed,  as  hee  well  deserved.  .  .  .  This  was  the  time,  which 
to  this  day  we  call  the  starving  time ;  it  were  too  vile  to  say, 
and  scarce  to  be  believed,  what  we  endured."^® 

The  misery  of  the  wretched  settlers  in  time  of  famine  is 
vividly  described  in  a  letter  written  in  1623  by  a  servant  to 
his  parents.  The  people,  he  said,  cried  out  day  and  night,  "Oh 
that  they  were  in  England  without  their  limbs  .  .  .  though 
they  begged  from  door  to  door".  He  declared  that  he  had 
eaten  more  at  home  in  a  day  than  was  now  allowed  him  in  a 
week,  and  that  his  parents  had  often  given  more  than  his 
present  day's  allowance  to  a  beggar  at  the  door.  Unless  the 
ship  Sea  Flower  came  soon,  with  supplies,  his  master's  men 
would  have  but  half  a  penny  loaf  each  a  day  for  food,  and 
might  be  turned  away  to  eat  bark  off  the  trees,  or  moulds  off 
the  ground.  "Oh,"  he  said,  "that  you  did  see  my  daily  and 
hourly  sighs,  groans,  -tears  and  thumps  that  I  afford  mine 
own  breast,  and  rue  and  curse  the  time  of  my  birth  and  with 
holy  Job  I  thought  no  head  had  been  able  to  hold  so  much 
water  as  hath  and  doth  daily  flow  from  mine  eyes."''^^ 

Thus  was  the  immigrant  to  Virginia  beset  on  all  sides  with 
deadly  perils.  If  he  escaped  the  plague,  the  yellow  fever  and  ] 
the  scurvy  during  his  voyage  across  the  Atlantic,  he  was  more 
than  apt  to  fall  a  victim  to  malaria  or  dysentery  after  he 
reached  his  new  home.  Even  if  he  survived  all  these  dangers, 
he  might  perish  miserably  of  hunger,  or  be  butchered  by  the 
savage  Indians.  No  wonder  he  cursed  the  country,  calling  it 
"a  miserie,  a  ruine,  a  death,  a  hell".''^^ 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  enterprise,  in  the  face  of  these 
stupendous  difficulties,  should  ever  have  succeeded.  The 
explanation  lies  in  the  great  enthusiasm  of  all  England  for  this 
attempt  to  extend  the  British  domains  to  the  shores  of  the  New 
World,  and  in  the  devotion  of  a  few  brave  spirits  of  the 
London  Company,  who  would  not  be  daunted  by  repeated 
failures.  It  mattered  not  to  them  that  thousands  of  pounds 
were  lost  in  the  undertaking,   that  many  hundreds  of  men 

'"Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  I,  p.  17;  Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  295;  Gen.,  pp.  330,  392, 
401,  404,  456. 
'*Va.  Vet.  "Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  117. 


i6  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

perished,  the  English  flag  and  the  EngHsh  religion  must  gain 
a  foothold  upon  the  American  continent. 

Sir  Thomas  Gates  found  the  colony  in  a  pitiable  condition. 
The  tomahawk  of  the  Indians,  famine  and  pestilence  had 
wrought  terrible  havoc  with  the  settlers.  A  mere  handful  of 
poor  wretched  men  were  left  to  welcome  the  newcomers  and  to 
beg  eagerly  to  be  taken  away  from  the  ill-fated  country.  The 
town  "appeared  rather  as  the  ruins  of  some  auntient  fortifica- 
tion, then  that  any  people  living  might  now  in  habit  it :  the 
pallisadces  he  found  tourne  downe,  the  pontes  open,  the  gates 
from  the  hinges,  the  church  ruined  and  unfrequented.  .  .  . 
Only  the  block  house  .  .  .  was  the  safetie  of  the  remainder 
that  lived :  which  yet  could  not  have  preserved  them  now  many 

days    longer    from    the    watching,     subtile,     and    offended 
Indians.'"^2 

Nor  was  it  in  the  power  of  Gates  to  remedy  these  conditions, 
for  he  had  brought  with  him  from  Devil's  Island  but  a  limited 
supply  of  provisions.  So,  with  great  reluctance,  the  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor decided  to  abandon  Virginia  rather  than  sac- 
rifice his  people.  As  the  colonists  climbed  aboard  the  vessels 
which  were  to  take  them  from  the  scene  of  their  sufferings, 
they  would  have  set  fire  to  the  town  had  not  Gates  prevented 
with  his  soldiers.  He,  himself,  "was  the  last  of  them,  when, 
about  noon,  giving  a  farewell  with  a  peale  of  small  shott,  he  set 
sayle,  and  that  night,  with  the  tide,  fell  down  .  .  .  the 
river.  ""^^ 

But  it  was  not  destined  that  this  enterprise,  which  was  of 
such  importance  to  the  English  nation,  should  be  thus  aban- 
doned. In  April,  1610,  De  la  Warr,  the  Lord  Governor,  had 
sailed  for  Virginia  with  three  vessels,  about  a  hundred  and 
fifty  immigrants  and  supplies  for  the  relief  of  the  colony.'^* 
Reaching  Cape  Comfort  June  the  sixteenth,  he  learned  from  a 
small  party  there  of  the  intended  desertion  of  Jamestown. 
Immediately  he  sent  a  pinnace  up  the  river  to  meet  Gates, 
advise  him  of  his  arrival  and  to  order  his  return  to  the  aban- 

"Gen.,  p.  405. 

'•Gen.,  p.  406;  Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  I,  p.  18. 

"F.  R.,  p.  127. 


I   - 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  17 

doned  town.  Upon  receiving  these  welcome  tidings,  Gates 
bore  "up  the  helm"  for  Jamestown,  and  the  same  night 
landed  all  his  men.*^^  Soon  after,  the  Governor  reached  the 
town  and  took  formal  possession  of  the  government. 

De  la  Warr  began  his  administration  by  listening  to  a 
sermon  from  the  good  pastor,  Mr.  Buck.  He  then  made  an 
address  to  the  people,  "laying  some  blames  on  them  for  many 
vanities  and  their  idleness",  and  promising,  if  occasion  re- 
quired, to  draw  the  sword  of  justice. ''^^ 

The  Governor  was  not  unrestrained  in  his  authority  over 
the  colonists,  for  he  was  to  "rule,  punish,  pardone  and  gov- 
erne  according  to  such  directions"  as  were  given  him  by  the 
London  Company.  In  case  of  rebellion  or  mutiny  he  might 
put  into  execution  martial  law.  In  matters  not  covered  by  his 
instructions  he  was  to  "rule  and  goveme  by  his  owne  discre- 
tion or  by  such  lawes"  as  he  should  think  fit  to  establish.'''' 
The  Council,  which  had  formerly  been  all-powerful,  was  now 
but  an  advisory  body,  appointed  by  the  Governor  and  remov- 
able at  his  discretion.  De  la  Warr  chose  for  his  Council  Sir 
Thomas  Gates,  Sir  George  Somers,  Captain  George  Percy, 
Sir  Ferdinando  Weinman,  Captain  Christopher  Newport  and 
William  Strachey,  Esquire.'^ 

Forgetting  their  former  quarrels  and  factions,  the  people 
united  in  a  zealous  effort  to  serve  their  noble  Governor. 
"You  might  shortly  behold  the  idle  and  restie  diseases  of 
a  divided  multitude,  by  the  unity  and  authority  of  the  govern- 
ment to  be  substantially  cured.  Those  that  knew  not  the  way 
to  goodnes  before,  but  cherished  singularity  and  faction,  can 
now  ohalke  out  the  path  of  all  respective  dutie  and  service."'^ 

For  a  while  peace  and  prosperity  seemed  to  have  come  at 
last  to  the  little  colony.  All  set  to  work  with  a  good  will  to 
build  comfortable  houses  and  to  repair  the  fort.  The  chapel 
was  restored.  The  Governor  furnished  it  with  a  communion 
table  of  black  walnut  and  with  pews  and  pulpit  of  cedar.  The 
font  was  "hewn  hollow  like  a  canoa".     "The  church  was  so 

"F.  R.,  p.  128;  Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  I,  p.  19;  Gen.,  p.  407. 

"Gen.,  p.  407.  "Gen.,   p.   379. 

"F.  R.,  p.  131.  '  "Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  I,  p.  20. 


i8  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

cast,  as  to  be  very  light  within  and  the  Governor  caused  it 
to  be  kept  passing  sweet  and  trimmed  up  with  divers  flowers." 
In  the  evening,  at  the  ringing  of  the  bell,  and  at  four  in  the 
afternoon,  each  man  addressed  himself  to  prayer.***'  "Every 
Sunday,  when  the  Lord  Governor  went  to  Church  he  was 
accompanied  with  all  the  Councillors,  Captains,  other  officers, 
and  all  the  gentlemen,  and  with  a  guard  of  fifty  Halberdiers  in 
his  Lordships  Livery,  fair  red  cloaks,  on  each  side  and  behind 
him.  The  Lord  Governor  sat  in  the  choir,  in  a  green  velvet 
chair,  with  a  velvet  cushion  before  him  on  which  he  knelt, 
and  the  Council,  captains,  and  officers,  on  each  side  of 
him."8i 

But  the  misfortunes  of  the  colony  were  far  from  being  at 
an  end.  The  principal  causes  of  disaster  had  not  yet  been 
removed.  Before  many  weeks  had  passed  the  "sickly  sea- 
son" came  on,  bringing  the  usual  accompaniment  of  suffering 
and  death.  "Not  less  than  150  of  them  died  of  pestilent  dis- 
eases, of  callentures  and  feavors,  within  a  few  months  after" 
Lord  De  la  Warr's  arrival.^^  So  universal  was  the  sickness 
among  the  newcomers  that  all  the  work  had  to  be  done  by  the 
old  settlers,  "who  by  use  weare  growen  practique  in  a  hard 
way  of  livinge".^^ 

The  war  with  the  Indians  continued  without  abatement, 
causing  constant  alarm  to  the  settlers  and  keeping  them  closely 
confined  to  their  forts.  At  one  time  fourteen  were  treacher- 
ously massacred  by  the  Queen  of  Appomattox.  The  English 
revenged  themselves  by  attacking  the  savages,  burning  their 
villages  and  destroying  their  crops,  but  they  could  not  force 
them  into  friendly  relations.^^ 

Lord  De  la  Warr,  himself,  was  assailed  by  a  series  of  mala- 
dies, that  came  near  costing  him  his  life.  "Presently  after 
my  arrival  in  James  Town,"  he  wrote,  "I  was  welcomed  by  a 
hot  and  violent  Ague,  which  held  mee  a  time.  .  .  .  That 
disease  had  not  long  left  mee,  till  ...  I  began  to  be  distem- 
pered with  other  greevous  sickness,  which  successively  &  sev- 

^  F.  R.,  pp.  129,  130.  ^  F.  R.,  p.  130. 

«F.  R.,  p.  134.  ""F.  R.,  p.  134. 

•*F.  R.,  pp.  135,  136. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  19 

erally  assailed  me :  for  besides  a  relapse  into  the  former 
disease;  .  .  .  the  Flux  surprised  me,  and  kept  me  many 
daies:  then  the  cramp  assaulted  my  weak  body,  with  strong 
paines;  &  afterward  the  Gout  afflicted  me  in  such  sort,  that 
making  my  body  through  weaknesse  unable  to  stirre,  .  .  . 
drew  upon  me  the  disease  called  Scurvy  .  .  .  till  I  was  upon 
the  point  to  leave  the  world. "^^  Realizing  that  it  would  be 
fatal  for  him  to  remain  longer  in  Virginia,  the  Lord  Governor 
set  sail  with  Captain  Argoll  for  the  West  Indies,  where,  he 
hoped,  he  would  recover  his  health. ^^  As  Gates  had  left  the 
colony  some  months  before,  the  government  fell  into  the  ex- 
perienced hands  of  Captain  George  Percy.^''^ 

In  the  meanwhile  the  London  Company,  undismayed  by  their 
former  failures,  were  preparing  a  new  expedition,  which  they 
hoped  would  establish  the  colony  upon  a  firm  footing.  Three 
hundred  immigrants,  carefully  selected  from  the  better  class 
of  working  men,  were  assembled  under  the  command  of  Sir 
Thomas  Dale,  and,  on  March  the  twenty-seventh,  161 1, 
embarked  for  Virginia.  Upon  the  arrival  of  the  fleet  at 
Jamestown,  Dale  received  the  letters  patent  from  Captain 
Percy,  and  assumed  command  of  the  colony  as  Deputy  for 
Lord  De  la  Warr.^® 

The  new  Governor  seems  to  have  perceived  at  once  that  the 
chief  source  of  disaster  had  been  the  location  of  the  settlement 
upon  the  Jamestown  peninsula.  The  small  area  which  this 
place  aflforded  for  the  planting  of  corn,  and  the  unheal th fulness 
of  the  climate  rendered  it  most  undesirable  as  the  site  for  a 
colony.  Former  Governors  had  refused  to  desert  the  penin- 
sula because  of  the  ease  with  which  it  could  be  defended 
against  the  Indians.  But  Dale  at  once  began  a  search  for 
a  spot  which  would  afford  all  the  security  of  Jamestown,  but 
be  free  from  its  many  disadvantages.  This  he  succeeded  in 
finding  up  the  river,  some  fifty  miles  from  Jamestown.®^  "I 
have  surveyed,"  he  wrote,  "a  convenient  strong,  healthie  and 
sweet  seate  to  plant  the  new  towne  in,  from  whence  might  be  no 

^  Gen.,  p.  479.  «*  Gen.,  p.  480. 

"F.  R.,  p.  137.  ^F.  R.,  p.  137. 

**Gen.,  p.  492;  Arb.  Smith,  p.  507;  F.  R.,  p.  150. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  21 

more  remove  of  the  principall  Seate."  This  place,  which  he 
named  Henrico,  was  located  not  far  from  the  point  of  junc- 
ture of  the  James  and  the  Appomattox,  at  what  is  now  called 
Farrar's  Island.  Here  the  river  makes  a  sweeping  curve, 
forming  a  peninsula  about  one  square  mile  in  extent. 

In  August,  161 1,  Sir  Thomas  Gates,  returning  to  assume 
the  command  of  the  colony,  pushed  vigorously  the  work  upon 
the  new  settlement.^*'  Dale  was  sent  up  the  river  with  no  less 
than  three  hundred  men,  with  directions  to  construct  houses 
and  fortifications.  The  settlers,  working  with  new  life  and 
vigor  in  the  more  wholesome  air  of  the  upper  James,  soon 
rendered  the  place  almost  impregnable  to  attack  from  the  In- 
dians. They  cut  a  ditch  across  the  narrow  neck  of  the  penin- 
sula, and  fortified  it  with  high  palisades.  To  prevent  a  sudden 
raid  by  the  savages  in  canoes  from  the  other  shore,  five  strong 
block  houses  were  built  at  intervals  along  the  river  bank. 
Behind  these  defenses  were  erected  a  number  of  substantial 
houses,  with  foundations  of  brick  and  frame  superstructures. 
Soon  a  town  of  three  streets  had  been  completed,  more  commo- 
dious and  far  more  healthful  than  Jamestown.^^ 

When  this  work  had  been  completed,  Dale  led  a  force  of 
men  across  to  the  south  bank  of  the  river  and  took  posses- 
sion of  the  entire  peninsula  lying  between  the  Appomattox 
and  the  James.  An  Indian  settlement  just  below  Turkey 
Island  bend  was  attacked  and  destroyed,  and  the  savages  driven 
away.  The  English  built  a  palisade  over  two  miles  long  and 
reinforced  at  intervals  with  forts  and  block  houses,  from  the 
James  at  Henrico  to  the  falls  of  the  Appomattox.  These  forti- 
fications secured  from  the  attacks  of  the  savages  "many  miles 
of  champion  and  woodland",  and  made  it  possible  for  the 
English  to  lay  out  in  safety  several  new  plantations  or  hun- 
dreds. Dale  named  the  place  Bermuda,  "by  reason  of  the 
strength  of  the  situation". 

Here,  for  the  first  time,  something  like  prosperity  came  to 
the  colony.  Although  the  "sicknesse"  was  not  entirely  elim- 
inated even  at  Henrico,  the  percentage  of  mortality  was  greatly 

»"  Gen.,  p.  474. 

"'Arb.  Smith,  pp.   509,  510;   F.  R.,  p.   157;   Cradle  of  Rep.,  p.  136. 


22  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

reduced.  Soon  there  were  in  Virginia  several  hundred  per- 
sons that  had  lived  through  the  fatal  months  of  June,  July, 
and  August  and  were  thoroughly  "seasoned"  or  immune  to 
the  native  disorders.  Not  until  1618,  when  the  settlers,  in 
their  greed  for  land  suitable  for  the  cultivation  of  tobacco, 
deserted  their  homes  on  the  upper  James  for  the  marshy  ground 
of  the  lower  country,  and  new,  unacclimated  persons  began 
arriving  in  great  numbers,  did  the  pestilence  again  assume  its 
former  proportions. 

Thus  protected  from  the  ravages  of  disease  and  from  the 
assaults  of  the  savages,  Dale's  men  were  able  to  turn  their 
attention  to  the  cultivation  of  the  soil.  Soon  they  were  pro- 
ducing an  annual  crop  of  com  sufficient  to  supply  their  more 
pressing  needs.  And  it  was  well  for  them  that  they  could 
become,  to  some  extent,  independent  of  England,  for  the  Lon- 
don Company,  at  last  discouraged  by  continued  misfortune, 
was  often  remiss  in  sending  supplies.  Clothing  became  ex- 
ceedingly scarce.  Not  only  were  the  gaudy  uniforms  of  De  la 
Warr's  time  lacking,  but  many  persons  were  forced  to  imitate 
the  savages  by  covering  themselves  with  skins  and  furs.®^  The 
Company,  however,  succeeded  in  obtaining  for  them  from  the 
King  many  suits  of  old  armor  that  were  of  great  value  in  their 
wars  with  the  savages.  Coats  of  mail  and  steel  that  had  be- 
come useless  on  the  battlefields  of  Europe  and  had  for  years 
been  rusting  in  the  Tower  of  London,  were  polished  up  and 
sent  to  Virginia.  Thus,  behind  the  palisades  of  Henrico  or  in 
the  fort  at  Jamestown  one  might  have  seen  at  this  time  sol- 
diers encased  in  armor  that  had  done  service  in  the  days  of 
Richard  III  and  Henry  VH.^^ 

The  London  Company,  when  they  sent  Sir  Thomas  Gates  to 
Virginia  with  the  letters  patent  of  1609,  gave  directions  that 
the  utmost  severity  should  be  used  in  putting  an  end  to  lawless- 
ness and  confusion.  Gates,  who  had  fought  against  the  Span- 
iards in  the  Netherlands  and  had  the  soldier's  dislike  of 
insubordination,  was  well  suited  to  carry  their  wishes  into 
effect.  No  sooner  had  he  arrived  from  Devil's  Island  in  1610 
than  he  posted  in  the  church  at  Jamestown  certain  laws,  orders 

"F.  R.,  p.  226.  "F.  R.,  p.  172. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  23 

and  instructions  which  he  warned  the  people  they  must  obey 
strictly.^*  These  laws  were  exceedingly  severe.  It  was,  for 
instance,  ordered  that  "every  man  and  woman  daly  twice  a 
day  upon  the  first  towling  of  the  Bell  shall  upon  the  working 
dales  repaire  into  the  Church,  to  hear  divine  Service  upon  pain 
of  losing  his  or  her  dayes  allowance  for  the  first  omission,  for 
the  second  to  be  whipt,  and  for  the  third  to  be  condemned  to 
the  Gallies  for  six  Months".  Again,  it  was  decreed  that  "no 
man  shall  g4ve  any  disgracefull  words,  or  commit  any  act  to  the 
disgrace  of  any  person  .  .  .  upon  paine  of  being  tied  head 
and  feete  together,  upon  the  guard  everie  night  for  the  space 
of  one  moneth.  .  .  .  No  man  shall  dare  to  kill,  or  destroy 
any  Bull,  Cow,  Calfe,  Mare,  Horse,  Colt,  Goate,  Swine,  Cocke, 
Henne,  Chicken,  Dogge,  Turkie,  or  any  tame  Cattel,  or 
Poultry,  of  what  condition  soever,  .  .  .  without  leave  from 
the  Generall,  upon  paine  of  death.  .  .  .  There  shall  no  man 
or  woman  .  .  .  dare  to  wash  any  unclean  linnen  .  .  .  within 
the  Pallizadoes,  .  .  .  nor  rench,  and  make  clean,  any  kettle, 
pot  or  pan  .  .  .  within  twenty  foote  of  the  olde  well  .  .  . 
upon  pain  of  whipping."®^ 

During  the  administration  of  Gates  and  De  la  Warr  these 
laws  seem  not  to  have  been  enforce  vigorously,  but  were 
utilized  chiefly  in  terrorem.^^  Under  Dale  and  Argoll,  how- 
ever, not  only  were  they  put  into  merciless  operation,  but  were 
reinforced  with  a  series  of  martial  laws,  drawn  from  the  code 
in  use  among  the  armies  of  the  Netherlands. 

The  Divine,  Moral  and  Martial  Laws,  as  they  were  called, 
undoubtedly  brought  about  good  order  in  the  colony,  and 
aided  in  the  establishment  of  prosperity,  but  they  were  ill 
suited  for  the  government  of  free-born  Englishmen.  They 
were  in  open  violation  of  the  rights  guaranteed  to  the  settlers 
in  their  charters,  and  caused  bitter  discontent  and  resentment. 

At  times  they  were  enforced  with  odious  harshness  and 
injustice.  Molina  declared  that  the  Governors  were  most 
cruel  in  their  treatment  of  the  people,  often  using  them  like 

•*F.  R.,  p.  126;  Gen.,  pp.  342,  345,  528,  529;  Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  II, 
pp.   9-19. 
•*  Force,  Vol.  Ill,  Tract  II,  pp.  9-19.    ^  Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.  Vol.  I,  p.  474, 


24  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

slaves.®''^  The  Virginia  Assembly  of  1624  gives  a  vivid,  though 
perhaps  an  exaggerated,  picture  of  the  severity  of  the  govern-' 
ment.  "The  Colony  .  .  .  remained  in  great  want  and  misery 
under  most  severe  and  Cruell  lawes  sent  over  in  printe,"  they 
said,  "and  contrary  to  the  express  Letter  of  the  Kinge  in  his 
most  gracious  Charter,  and  as  mercylessly  executed,  often 
times  without  tryall  or  Judgment."  Many  of  the  people  fled 
"for  reliefe  to  the  Savage  Enemy,  who  being  taken  againe 
were  putt  to  sundry  deathes  as  by  hanginge,  shooting  and 
breaking  uppon  the  wheele  and  others  were  forced  by  famine 
to  filch  for  their  bellies,  of  whom  one  for  steelinge  of  2  or  3 
pints  of  oatmeale  had  a  bodkin  thrust  through  his  tounge 
and  was  tyed  with  a  chain  to  a  tree  untill  he  starved,  if  a 
man  through  his  sicknes  had  not  been  able  to  worke,  he  had 
noe  allowance  at  all,  and  soe  consequently  perished.  Many 
through  these  extremities,  being  weary  of  life,  digged  holes  in 
the  earth  and  there  hidd  themselves  till  they  famished."®^  In 
1 61 2,  several  men  attempted  to  steal  "a  barge  and  a  shallop  and 
therein  to  adventure  their  lives  for  their  native  country,  being 
discovered  and  prevented,  were  shot  to  death,  hanged  and 
broken  upon  the  wheel". ^^  There  was  some  criticism  in  Eng- 
land of  the  harshness  of  the  laws,  but  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  then 
the  guiding  spirit  of  the  London  Company,  declared  that  they 
were  beneficial  and  necessary,  "in  some  cases  ad  terrorum, 
and  in  others  to  be  truly  executed".  ^^" 

As  time  passed  and  the  population  of  the  colony  increased, 
it  became  necessary  to  extend  beyond  the  confines-  of  James- 
town and  Henrico.  The  cultivation  of  tobacco,  which  was 
rapidly  becoming  the  leading  pursuit  of  the  people,  required 
more  ground  than  was  comprised  within  the  fortified  dis- 
tricts. Even  the  expansion  of  the  settlement  upon  the  upper 
James  to  other  peninsulas  along  the  "Curls  of  the  River"  could 
not  satisfy  the  demand  for  arable  land.  At  one  time  the 
very  streets  of  Jamestown  were  planted  with  tobacco. ^^^  Soon 
the  people,  despite  their  dread  of  the  savages,  were  deserting 
their  palisades,  and  spreading  out  in  search  of  fertile  soil. 

•'Gen.,  p.  648.  "'Nar.  of  Va.,  pp.  422,  423. 

*  F.  R.,  pp.  148,  172.  '"•  Gen.,  pp.  529,  530. 

^  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  222. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  25 

This  recklessness  brought  upon  the  colony  a  renewal  of  the 
disastrous  epidemics  of  the  earlier  period,  and  exposed  the 
planters  to  imminent  danger  from  the  savages.  Fortunately, 
however,  at  this  very  time  the  long  sought  peace  with  the 
Indians  was  brought  about  by  the  romantic  marriage  of  Poca- 
hontas, the  daughter  of  the  powerful  chief  Powhatan,  with 
Captain  John  Rolfe. 

In  the  spring  of  161 3  Sir  Samuel  Argoll,  while  cruising  in 
the  Rappahannock  in  quest  of  corn,  learned  from  the  natives 
that  the  princess  was  visiting  Japazaws,  a  neighboring  king, 
at  his  village  upon  the  Potomac.  Argoll  at  once  resolved 
to  capture  the  daughter  of  the  greatest  enemy  of  the  white 
men,  and  to  hold  her  until  all  the  tools  and  weapons 
stolen  by  the  Indians  had  been  retumed.^'^^  Hastening  into 
the  country  of  the  Potomacs,  he  demanded  the  maid  of  Japa- 
zaws. The  king,  fearing  the  hostility  of  the  English  more 
than  the  anger  of  Powhatan,  consented,  although  with  great 
reluctance,  and  she  was  placed  aboard  Argoll's  ship. 

The  news  of  the  capture  of  his  favorite  child  filled 
Powhatan  with  rage  and  grief.  Imploring  Argoll  to  do 
Pocahontas  no  harm,  he  promised  to  yield  to  all  his  demands 
and  to  become  the  lasting  friend  of  the  white  men.^"^  He 
liberated  seven  captives  and  sent  with  them  "three  pieces,  one 
broad  Axe,  and  a  long  whip-saw,  and  one  canow  of  Corne".^^* 
Knowing  that  these  did  not  constitute  all  the  tools  in  the  hands 
of  the  king,  the  English  refused  to  relinquish  Pocahontas,  but 
kept  her  a  prisoner  at  Jamestown. ^'^^ 

The  young  princess  was  treated  with  consideration  and 
kindness  by  Governor  Dale.  Her  gentle  nature,  her  intelli- 
gence and  her  beauty  won  the  respect  and  love  of  the  sternest 
of  her  captors.  Dale  himself  undertook  to  direct  her  educa- 
tion. "I  was  moved,"  he  exclaimed,  "by  her  desire  to  be 
taught  and  instructed  in  the  knowledge  of  God,  her  capable- 
ness  of  understanding,  her  aptness  and  willingness  to  receive 
any  good  impression.  ...  I  caused  her  to  be  carefully  in- 
structed in  the  Christian  religion,  who,  after  she  had  made 

"'  Gen.,  p.  642.  "*  Gen.,  p.  643. 

"^  Gen.,  pp.  643,  644.  ""  Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  308. 


26  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

some  good  progress  therein,  renounced  publicly  her  Country's 
idolatry ;  openly  confessed  her  Christian  faith ;  and  was,  as ' 
she  desired,  baptized."^^® 

Before  many  months  had  passed  the  charm  of  this  daughter 
of  the  American  forest  had  inspired  a  deep  love  in  the  breast 
of  Captain  John  Rolfe.  This  worthy  gentleman,  after  strug- 
gling long  against  a  passion  so  strange  and  unusual,  wrote 
Dale  asking  permission  to  wed  the  princess.  I  am  not  ignor- 
*  ant,  he  said  "of  the  inconvenience  which  may  .  .  .  arise  .  .  . 
to  be  in  love  with  one  whose  education  hath  bin  rude,  her 
manners  barbarous,  her  generation  accursed". ^^''^  But  I  am  led 
to  take  this  step,  "for  the  good  of  the  plantation,  for  the 
honour  of  our  countrie,  for  the  glory  of  God,  for  my  owne 
salvation,  and  for  the  converting  to  the  true  knowledge  of 
God  and  Jesus  Christ,  an  unbeleeving  creature,  like  Pokahun- 
tas.  To  whom  my  heartie  and  best  thoughts  are,  and  have 
a  long  time  bin  so  intangied,  and  inthralled  an  so  intri- 
cate a  laborinth,  that  I  was  awearied  to  unwinde  myselfe 
thereout."io8 

Dale,  overjoyed  at  this  opportunity  to  secure  the  friendship 
of  the  Indians,  consented  readily  to  the  marriage.  Powhatan, 
too,  when  he  learned  of  his  daughter's  affection  for  Captain 
Rolfe,  expressed  his  approval  of  the  union,  and  sent  Apachisco, 
an  uncle  of  the  bride,  and  two  of  her  brothers  to  represent 
him  at  the  ceremony. 

Both  English  and  Indians  regarded  this  wedding  as  a  bond 
of  friendship  between  the  two  races.  Apachisco,  acting  as 
deputy  for  Powhatan,  concluded  with  Governor  Dale  a  peace 
which  lasted  eight  years  and  was  fairly  well  kept  by  both 
parties.^®®  "Besides  this,"  wrote  Captain  Ralph  Hamor,  "we 
became  in  league  with  our  next  neighbors,  the  Chicahamanias, 
a  lustie  and  daring  people,  free  of  themselves.  These  people, 
as  soone  as  they  heard  of  our  peace  with  Powhatan,  sent  two 
messengers  with  presents  to  Sir  Thomas  Dale  and  offered  .  .  . 
their  service."^^®     Thus  was  one  of  the  greatest  menaces  to 

"•Arb.  Smith,  p.  512.  "' Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  241. 

"•Nar.  of  Va.,  pp.  240,  241.  ^"^F.  R.,  p.  205;  Arb.  Smith,  p.  514. 

""Arb.  Smith,  p.  515. 


THE  FOUNDING  OF  VIRGINIA  27 

the  prosperity  of  the  colony  removed.  Now  the  settlers  could 
cultivate  the  soil,  or  hunt  and  fish  without  fear  of  the  treacher- 
ous savage,  and  leave  their  cattle  to  range  in  comparative 
safety.  John  Rolfe  himself  wrote,  "The  great  blessings  of 
God  have  followed  this  peace,  and  it,  next  to  him,  hath  bredd 
our  plentie — everie  man  sitting  under  his  fig  tree  in  safety, 
gathering  and  reaping  the  fruits  of  their  labors  with  much 
joy  and  comfort."^^^ 

In  1 61 6  Sir  Thomas  Dale,  who  had  been  in  command  of 
the  colony  since  the  departure  of  Gates  in  1614,  returned  to 
England,  leaving  the  government  in  the  hands  of  Captain 
George  Yeardley.  Despite  the  harshness  and  cruelty  of  Dale 
and  Gates,  they  must  be  credited  with  obtaining  the  final 
success  of  the  colony.  These  two  stern  soldiers  of  the  Dutch 
wars  had  found  the  settlers  dispirited,  reduced  in  numbers, 
fighting  a  losing  battle  against  pestilence,  starvation  and  the 
savages.  By  their  rigid  discipline  and  able  leadership  they 
had  brought  unity  and  prosperity,  had  taught  the  people  how 
to  resist  the  sickness,  and  had  secured  a  long  peace  with  the 
Indians. ^^^  Dale  left  about  three  hundred  and  fifty  persons 
in  Virginia,  most  of  them  thoroughly  acclimated  and  busily 
engaged  in  building  up  prosperity  for  the  colony. 

Tobacco  was  already  becoming  the  staple  product  of  Vir- 
ginia. As  early  as  161 2  Captain  Rolfe  had  been  experimenting 
with  the  native  leaf,  in  an  effort  to  make  it  suitable  for  the 
English  market.  ^^^  In  161 3  he  sent  a  part  of  his  crop  to  Lon- 
don, where  it  was  tested  by  experts  and  pronounced  to  be  of 
excellent  quality. -^^^  The  colonists  were  greatly  encouraged 
at  the  success  of  the  venture,  for  the  price  of  tobacco  was  high, 
and  its  culture  afforded  opportunities  for  a  rich  return.  Soon 
every  person  that  could  secure  a  little  patch  of  ground  was 
devoting  himself  eagerly  to  the  cultivation  of  the  plant.  It 
even  became  necessary  for  Dale  to  issue  an  order  that  each 
man  should  "set  two  acres  of  ground  with  corn",  lest  the 
new  craze  should  lead  to  the  neglect  of  the  food  supply."^    In 

^"F.  R.,  p.  226.  ^"F.  R.,  pp.  230,  236. 

""Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  211. 
"*F.  R.,  p.  197;  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  217. 
^F.  R.,  p.  228;  Gen.,  p.  782. 


28  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

1 617  The  George  sailed  for  England  laden  with  20,ocx) 
pounds  of  tobacco,  which  found  a  ready  market  at  five  shil- 
lings and  three  pence  a  pound.  John  Rolfe's  discovery  was 
opening  for  Virginia  a  veritable  gold  mine. 

Fortunately  the  King,  in  161 2,  had  granted  the  Company  an 
exemption  for  seven  years  from  custom  duties  upon  goods 
brought  from  the  colony.  So,  for  a  while,  at  least,  the  Crown 
could  not  appropriate  to  its  own  use  the  profits  from  the 
Virginia  tobacco.  Since,  however,  the  exemption  had  only  a 
few  years  more  to  run,  the  Company  hastened  to  secure  what 
immediate  returns  were  available.  They  took  from  the  plant- 
ers the  entire  crop,  giving  them  for  it  three  pence  per  pound, 
while  they  themselves  were  able  to  obtain  a  much  larger 
price  from  the  English  dealers. 

The  profits  thus  secured  were  at  once  utilized  in  new  meas- 
ures for  increasing  and  strengthening  the  colony.  En- 
couraged by  the  discovery  in  Virginia  of  so  profitable  a 
commodity,  the  Company  became  convinced  that  now  at  last 
success  was  at  hand.  "Broadsides"  were  sent  out  to  the 
British  people,  depicting  in  glowing  terms  the  advantages  of 
the  country,  and  asking  for  immigrants  and  for  financial  sup- 
port. Once  more  a  wave  of  enthusiasm  for  the  enterprise 
swept  over  England.  Money  was  contributed  liberally.  The 
clergy,  interested  in  the  spread  of  the  Anglican  Church,  and 
in  the  conversion  of  the  savages,  worked  ardently  for  the 
success  of  the  colony.  Soon  vessel  after  vessel  was  being 
fitted  out  for  the  voyage  across  the  Atlantic,  and  hundreds  of 
artisans  and  laborers  were  preparing  to  risk  their  all  in  the 
New  World.ii« 

"•F.  R.,  p.  209. 


\ 


CHAPTER  II 
The  Establishment  of  Representative  Government 

King  James  I,  from  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  was  deeply- 
desirous  of  planting  the  English  nation  upon  the  shores  of 
the  New  World.  It  was  with  envy  and  alarm  that  he  wit- 
nessed the  extension  of  the  power  of  Spain  and  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church  across  the  Atlantic,  while  his  own  subjects 
were  excluded  from  a  share  in  the  splendid  prize.  He  must 
have  perceived  clearly  that  if  the  English  wished  to  maintain 
their  position  as  a  great  naval  and  mercantile  people,  the  es- 
tablishing of  colonies  in  America  was  imperative.  Peru, 
Mexico  and  the  West  Indies  added  greatly  to  the  wealth  and 
power  of  the  Spanish  King;  why  should  England  not  attempt 
to  gain  a  foothold  near  these  countries,  before  it  became 
too  late? 

But  James  had  no  desire  to  arouse  the  hostility  of  Philip  III. 
Despite  religious  differences,  despite  the  hatred  of  the  English 
for  the  Spaniards,  he  had  reversed  the  policy  of  Elizabeth  by 
cultivating  the  friendship  of  these  hereditary  enemies.  And 
so  wedded  was  he  to  this  design,  that  later,  when  his  son-in-law, 
Frederick  of  the  Palatinate,  was  being  overwhelmed  by  a 
coalition  of  Catholic  nations,  he  refused  to  affront  Spain  by 
coming  to  his  rescue.  Yet  he  knew  that  Philip  considered 
America  his  own,  and  would  resent  any  attempt  of  the  Eng- 
lish to  establish  colonies  on  its  shores.  So  the  crafty  James 
resolved  to  disguise  the  founding  of  a  royal  colony  under  the 
guise  of  a  private  venture.^  If  the  Spaniards  complained  of 
the  occupation  of  their  territory,  he  could  free  himself  from 
blame  by  placing  the  responsibility  upon  the  London  Com- 
pany. "If  it  take  not  success,"  his  advisors  told  the  King, 
"it  is  done  by  their  owne  heddes.  It  is  but  the  attempt  of 
private  gentlemen,  the  State  suffers  noe  losse,  noe  disreputa- 
'F.  R..  p.  6. 

29 


30  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

tion.     If  it  takes  success,  they  are  your  subjects,  they  doe  it 
for  your  service,  they  will  lay  all  at  your  Majesty's  feet  and* 
interess  your  Majesty  therein. "^ 

James  was  quite  liberal  in  granting  charters  to  those  that 
had  undertaken  the  settlement,  and  he  encouraged  them  as 
much  as  was  consistent  with  his  friendship  for  Spain.  It  was 
truly  written  of  him  after  his  death,  "Amongst  the  .  .  . 
workes  of  the  late  Kinge,  there  was  none  more  eminent,  than 
his  gracious  inclination  ...  to  advance  and  sett  forward  a 
New  Plantation  in  the  New  World."^  That  he  was  deeply 
interested  in  the  undertaking  is  shown  most  strikingly  by  his 
consent  to  the  establishment  of  the  Puritans  in  America.  James 
hated  the  tenets  of  Calvin  from  the  depths  of  his  soul,  and 
could  have  no  desire  to  see  them  infect  the  English  settlements 
in  America,  yet  his  solicitude  for  the  welfare  of  the  colony 
induced  him  to  yield  to  the  request  of  the  Pilgrims  for  per- 
mission to  settle  there.  How  much  greater  was  his  foresight 
than  that  of  Louis  XIV,  who,  by  refusing  to  allow  the  perse- 
cuted Huguenots  to  settle  in  any  part  of  his  domains,  deprived 
the  French  colonies  of  what  might  have  been  their  most  numer- 
ous and  valuable  recruits !  When  some  of  the  leading  men  of 
the  London  Company  pleaded  with  James  for  the  Puritans, 
the  King  lent  a  ready  ear.  He  was  asked  to  allow  them 
"liberty  of  conscience  under  his  .  .  .  protection  in  America; 
where  they  would  endeavour  the  advancement  of  his  Majesty's 
dominions,  and  the  enlargement  of  the  interests  of  the  Gospel". 
James  replied  that  it  was  "a  good  and  honest  motion".  He 
refused  to  tolerate  them  by  public  authority  and  would  not 
confirm  under  the  broad  seal  their  petition  for  leave  to  worship 
as  they  chose,  but  he  let  it  be  understood  that  they  were  not 
to  be  molested  in  their  new  homes  in  any  way.^  And  in  this 
promise  they  finally  decided  to  put  their  trust,  feeling  that  "if 
afterwards  there  should  be  a  purpose  or  desire  to  wrong  them, 
though  they  had  a  scale  as  broad  as  ye  house  flore,  it  would 
not  serve  ye  turn;  for  ther  would  be  means  a  new  found  to 
recall  or  reverse  it".° 

'F.  R.,  p.  76.  ■Gen.,  p.  1027. 

*F.  R.,  p.  26s.  'F.  R.,  p.  271. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  31 

But  the  chief  glory  of  the  establishment  of  the  English  in 
America  must  be  given  to  the  patriotic  and  persevering  men 
of  the  Virginia  Company.  It  is  erroneous  and  unjust  to 
accuse  them  of  mean  and  mercenary  motives  in  founding  and 
maintaining  the  colony  at  Jamestown.  Some  of  them,  per- 
haps, were  dazzled  with  visions  of  a  rich  harvest  of  gold  and 
silver,  but  most  must  have  realized  that  there  was  small  chance 
of  remuneration.  Many  were  merchants  and  business  men  of 
great  foresight  and  ability,  and  it  is  quite  evident  that  they 
were  fully  aware  of  the  risks  of  the  undertaking  in  which  they 
ventured  their  money.  What  they  did  hope  to  gain  from  the 
colony  was  the  propagation  of  the  English  Church,  the  exten- 
sion of  the  English  nation  and  its  institutions,  and  the  increase 
of  British  trade. 

Over  and  over  again  it  was  asserted  that  the  first  object  of 
the  enterprise  was  to  spread  the  Christian  religion.  In  1610 
the  London  Company  declared  it  their  especial  purpose  "to 
preach  and  baptize  .  .  .  and  by  propagation  of  the  Gospell, 
to  recover  out  of  the  armes  of  the  Divell,  a  number  of  poore 
and  miserable  soules,  wrapt  up  unto  death,  in  almost  invincible 
ignorance".®  The  first  draft  of  the  Virginia  charter  of  1606 
declared  that  the  leading  motive  of  this  "noble  work",  was 
"the  planting  of  Christianity  amongst  heathens".'^  The  charter 
of  1609  asserted  that  the  "principle  effect,  which  we  can  desire 
or  expect  of  this  action,  is  the  conversion  and  reduction  of 
the  people  in  those  parts  unto  the  true  worship  of  God".^ 

That  they  were  also  actuated  by  a  desire  to  extend  the 
British  possessions  and  trade  is  attested  by  numerous  docu- 
ments and  letters.  The  Company  declared  it  their  purpose 
to  promote  the  "honor  and  safety  of  the  Kingdome,  the 
strength  of  our  Navy,  the  visible  hope  of  a  great  and  rich 
trade".®  One  of  the  leading  shareholders  wrote  that  the  col- 
ony should  be  upheld  for  "ye  Honor  and  profitt  to  our  Nation, 
to  make  provinciall  to  us  a  land  ready  to  supply  us  with  all 

•  Gen.,  p.  339.  '  F.  R.,  p.  6. 

*Gen.   p.   236.     Compare   F.   R.,   pp.   262,   263,   264,   31,   248,  80;    Gen., 
pp.  49,  146. 
» F.  R.,  p.  80. 


32  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

necessary  commodytyes  wanting  to  us:  In  which  alone  we 
suffer  ye  Spanish  reputation  and  power  to  swell  over  us."*® 
The  colonists  themselves  declared  that  one  of  the  objects  of  the 
settlement  of  America  was  the  extension  of  British  territory 
and  the  enriching  of  the  kingdom,  "for  which  respects  many 
noble  and  well  minded  persons  were  induced  to  adventure 
great  sums  of  money  to  the  advancement  of  so  pious  and  noble 
a  worke".^^ 

The  Company,  in  fact,  did  no  more  than  take  the  lead  in  the 
work.  It  was  really  the  English  nation  that  had  decided  to 
second  their  King  in  gaining  a  foothold  in  America,  and  it 
was  they  that  insisted  that  this  foothold  should  not  be  relin- 
quished. Again  and  again  the  London  Company  appealed 
to  the  people  for  support,  and  never  without  success,  for  all 
classes  of  Englishmen  felt  that  they  were  interested  in  this 
new  venture.  The  spirit  of  the  nation  is  reflected  in  the 
statement  of  the  Council  for  Virginia  in  1610,  that  the  Com- 
pany "are  so  farre  from  yielding  or  giving  way  to  any  hin- 
drance or  impeachment  .  .  .  that  many  .  .  .  have  given 
their  hands  and  subscribed  to  contribute  againe  and  againe  to 
new  supplies  if  need  require". ^^ 

But  although  James  I  and  his  people  were  agreed  as  to  the 
necessity  of  extending  the  English  nation  to  America,  they 
were  not  in  accord  in  regard  to  the  form  of  government  which 
should  be  established  there.  The  King,  who  was  always 
restive  under  the  restraint  placed  upon  him  by  the  English 
Parliament,  had  no  desire  to  see  the  liberal  institutions  of  the 
mother  country  transplanted  to  Virginia.  He  wished,  beyond 
doubt,  to  build  a  colonial  empire  which  should  be  dependent 
upon  himself  for  its  government  and  which  should  add  to  the 
royal  revenues.  In  this  way  he  would  augment  the  power 
of  the  Crown  and  render  it  less  subject  to  the  restraint  of 
Parliament.  But  to  found  colonies  that  would  set  up  little 
assemblies  of  their  own  to  resist  and  thwart  him,  was  not 
at  all  his  intention. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  of  the  leading  spirits  of  the  Lon- 

"  F.  R.,  p.  49.  "  Gen.,  p.  50. 

"  Gen.,  p.  355. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  33 

don  Company  hoped  "to  establish  a  more  free  government  in 
Virginia".^^  Some,  perhaps,  feared  that  the  Hberties  of  the 
EngHsh  people  might  be  suppressed  by  the  King,  and  they 
looked  hopefully  to  this  new  land  as  a  haven  for  the  oppressed. 
"Many  worthy  Patriots,  Lords,  Knights,  gentlemen,  Mer- 
chants and  others  .  .  .  laid  hold  on  .  .  .  Virginia  as  a 
providence  cast  before  them."^^  In  the  meetings  of  the  Com- 
pany were  gathered  so  many  that  were  "most  distasted  with 
the  proceedings  of  the  Court,  and  stood  best  affected  to  Re- 
ligion and  Liberty",  that  James  began  to  look  upon  the  body 
as  a  "Seminary  for  a  seditious  Parliament". ^^ 

The  leader  of  these  liberals  was  Sir  Edwin  Sandys.  This 
man,  who  was  widely  known  as  an  uncompromising  enemy  of 
despotism,  was  heartily  detested  by  the  King.^®  In  his  youth 
he  had  gone  to  Geneva  to  study  the  reformed  religion  and 
while  there  had  become  most  favorably  impressed  with  the 
republican  institutions  of  the  little  Swiss  state.  He  was  after- 
wards heard  to  say  that  "he  thought  that  if  God  from  heaven 
did  constitute  and  direct  a  forme  of  government  on  Earth 
it  was  that  of  Geneva".  ^''^  Returning  to  England,  he  had  en- 
tered Parliament,  where  he  had  become  known  as  an  eminent 
advocate  of  liberal  principles.  He  had  contended  for  the 
abolition  of  commercial  monopolies;  had  demanded  that  all 
accused  persons  be  given  the  assistance  of  counsel;  had  de- 
nounced many  of  the  unjust  impositions  of  the  Crown;  had 
raised  "his  voice  for  the  toleration  of  those  with  whom  he 
did  not  wholly  agree" ;  and  had  aided  in  drawing  up  the  re- 
monstrance against  the  conduct  of  James  towards  his  first 
Parliament.^^ 

But  Sandys  and  his  friends  were  not  without  opposition  in 
the  London  Company.  Many  of  the  "adventurers",  as  the 
stockholders  were  called,  were  by  no  means  willing  to  permit 
the  liberal  party  to  utilize  the  Company  as  an  instrument  for 
propagating  their  political  tenets.  The  great  struggle  be- 
tween the  forces  of  progress  and  reaction  that  was  convulsing 

"F.  R.,  p.  558.  "F.  R.,  p.  85. 

"  F.  R.,  p.  237.  '"  F.  R.,  vi. 

"F.  R.,  p.  251.  "F.  R.,  p.  75. 


34  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Parliament  and  the  nation,  was  fought  over  again  in  the 
Quarter  Courts.  At  times  the  meetings  resounded  with  the 
quarrels  of  the  contending  factions.  Eventually,  however, 
Sandys  was  victorious,  and  representative  government  in 
America  was  assured. 

Sandys  seems  to  have  planned  to  secure  from  the  King  suc- 
cessive charters  each  more  liberal  than  its  predecessor,  and 
each  entrusting  more  fully  the  control  of  the  colony  to  the 
Company.  This  could  be  done  without  arousing  the  suspicions 
of  James  under  the  pretext  that  they  were  necessary  for  the 
success  of  the  enterprise.  When  at  length  sufficient  power 
had  been  delegated,  Sandys  designed  to  establish  in  Vir- 
ginia a  representative  assembly,  modelled  upon  the  British 
Parliament. 

Under  the  provisions  of  the  charter  of  1606  Virginia  had 
been,  in  all  but  form,  a  royal  colony.  The  King  had  drawn 
up  the  constitution,  had  appointed  the  Council  in  England,  and 
had  controlled  their  policies.  This  charter  had  granted  no 
semblance  of  self-government  to  the  settlers.  But  it  was  de- 
clared "They  shall  have  and  enjoy  all  the  liberties,  franchises, 
and  immunities  ...  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  as  if  they  had 
been  abiding  and  born,  within  .  .  .  this  realm  of  England". ^^ 
This  promise  was  not  kept  by  the  Kings  of  England.  Several 
of  the  provisions  of  the  charter  itself  were  not  consistent  with 
it.  In  later  years  it  was  disregarded  again  and  again  by  the 
royal  commissions  and  instructions.  Yet  it  was  of  the  utmost 
importance,  for  it  set  a  goal  which  the  colonists  were  deter- 
mined to  attain.  Throughout  the  entire  colonial  period  they 
contended  for  all  the  rights  of  native  Englishmen,  and  it  was 
the  denial  of  their  claim  that  caused  them  to  revolt  from  the 
mother  country  and  make  good  their  independence.  Provi- 
sion had  also  been  made  for  trial  by  jury.  James  had  decreed 
that  in  all  cases  the  Council  should  sit  as  a  court,  but  in  matters 
of  "tumults,  rebellion,  conspiracies,  mutiny,  and  seditions  .  .  . 
murther,  manslaughter",  and  other  crimes  punishable  with 
death,  guilt  or  innocence  was  to  be  determined  by  a  jury  of 
twelve.     To  what  extent  the  Council  made  use  of  the  jury 

"Gen.,  pp.  60,  61. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  35 

system  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  Wingfield  states  that  on 
one  occasion  he  was  tried  before  a  jury  for  slander,  and 
fined  £300.2*^ 

The  second  charter  had  been  granted  in  1609.  This  docu- 
ment is  of  great  importance  because  through  it  the  King  re- 
signed the  actual  control  of  the  colony  into  the  hands  of  the 
Virginia  Company.  And  although  this  did  not  result  imme- 
diately in  the  establishment  of  representative  government,  it 
strengthened  the  hands  of  Sandys  and  made  it  possible  for  him 
to  carry  out  his  designs  at  a  future  date.  Under  this  charter 
the  Company  might  have  set  up  liberal  institutions  at  once  in 
Virginia,  but  conditions  were  not  ripe,  either  in  England  or 
in  America,  for  so  radical  a  change. 

In  1 61 2  the  third  charter  had  been  granted.  This  had  still 
further  strengthened  the  Company  and  made  them  more  inde- 
pendent of  the  King.  It  gave  them  the  important  privilege  of 
holding  great  quarterly  meetings  or  assemblies,  where  all 
matters  relating  to  the  government  of  the  colony  could  be 
openly  discussed.  Still  Virginia  remained  under  the  autocratic 
rule  of  Dale  and  Gates. 

In  1 61 7  or  1 61 8,  however,  when  the  liberals  were  in  full 
control  of  the  Company,  it  was  decided  to  grant  the  colonists 
the  privilege  of  a  parliaments^  In  April,  1618,  Lord  De  la 
Warr  sailed  for  Virginia  to  reassume  active  control  of  affairs 
there,  bringing  with  him  instructions  to  establish  a  new  form 
of  government.  What  this  government  was  to  have  been 
is  not  known,  but  it  was  designed  by  Sir  Edwin  Sandys,  and 
beyond  doubt,  was  liberal  in  form.^^  Possibly  it  was  a  dupli- 
cate of  that  established  the  next  year  by  Governor  Yeardley. 
Most  unfortunately,  Lord  De  la  Warr,  whose  health  had  been 
shattered  by  his  first  visit  to  Virginia,  died  during  the  voyage 
across  the  Atlantic,  and  it  became  necessary  to  continue  the 
old  constitution  until  the  Company  could  appoint  a  successor. ^^ 

In  November,  1618,  George  Yeardley  was  chosen  Governor- 
General  of  Virginia,  and  was  intrusted  with  several  documents 
by  whose  authority  he  was  to  establish  representative  govem- 

"*  Arb.  Smith,  Ixxxiii.  "  F.  R.,  p.  266. 

*"  F.  R.,  p.  2^.  ^  F.  R.,  pp.  281,  282. 


36  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

ment  in  the  colony.^^  These  papers,  which  became  known  as 
the  Virginia  Magna  Charta,  were  the  very  corner-stone  of 
liberty  in  the  colony  and  in  all  America.  Their  importance 
can  hardly  be  exaggerated,  for  they  instituted  the  first  repre- 
sentative assembly  of  the  New  World,  and  established  a  gov- 
ernment which  proved  a  bulwark  against  royal  prerogative 
for  a  century  and  a  half. 

Governor  Yeardley  sailed  from  England  January,  1619,  and 
reached  Virginia  on  the  29th  of  April,  After  some  weeks  of 
preparation,  he  issued  a  general  proclamation  setting  in  opera- 
tion the  Company's  orders.  It  was  decreed,  "that  all  those 
who  were  resident  here  before  the  departure  of  Sir  Thomas 
Dale  should  be  freed  and  acquitted  from  such  publique  services 
and  labors  which  formerly  they  suffered,  and  that  those  cruel 
laws  by  which  we  had  so  long  been  governed  were  now  abro- 
gated, and  that  now  we  were  to  be  governed  by  those  free 
laws  which  his  Majesty's  subjects  live  under  in  Englande.  .  .  . 
And  that  they  might  have  a  hand  in  the  governing  of  them- 
selves, it  was  granted  that  a  General  Assembly  should  be  held 
yearly  once,  whereat  were  to  be  present  the  Governor  and 
Counsell,  with  two  Burgesses  from  each  plantation  freely  to  be 
elected  by  the  inhabitants  thereof ;  this  Assembly  to  have  power 
to  make  and  ordaine  whatsoever  lawes  and  orders  should  by 
them  be  thought  good  and  proffittable  for  our  subsistence."^^ 

The  exact  date  of  the  election  for  Burgesses  is  not  known.^' 
The  statement  that  the  representatives  were  to  be  "chosen  by 
the  inhabitants"  seems  to  indicate  that  the  franchise  was  at 
once  given  to  all  male  adults,  or  at  least  to  all  freemen.  "All 
principall  officers  in  Virginia  were  to  be  chosen  by  ye  ballot- 
ing box."  From  the  very  first  there  were  parties,  and  it  is 
possible  that  the  factions  of  the  London  Company  were  re- 
flected at  the  polls  in  the  early  elections.  The  Magna  Charta 
made  provision  for  the  establishment  of  boroughs,  which  were 
to  serve  both  as  units  for  local  government  and  as  electoral  dis- 
tricts. No  attempt  was  made  to  secure  absolute  uniformity  of 
population  in  the  boroughs,  but  there  were  no  glaring  inequali- 

»*F.R.,  p.  293.  ''F.  R.,  p.  312. 

-F.  R..  p.  315. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  37 

ties.  With  the  regard  for  the  practical  which  has  always  been 
characteristic  of  Englishmen,  the  Company  seized  upon  the 
existing  units,  such  as  towns,  plantations  and  hundreds,  as  the 
basis  of  their  boroughs.  In  some  cases  several  of  these  units 
were  merged  to  form  one  borough,  in  others,  a  plantation  or  a 
town  or  a  hundred  as  it  stood  constituted  a  borough.  As  there 
were  eleven  of  these  districts  and  as  each  district  chose  two 
Burgesses,  the  first  General  Assembly  was  to  contain  twenty- 
two  representatives.^^ 

The  Assembly  convened  at  Jamestown,  August  9th,  161 9. 
"The  most  convenient  place  we  could  finde  to  sitt  in,"  says  the 
minutes,  "was  the  Quire  of  the  Churche  Where  Sir  George 
Yeardley,  the  Governor,  being  sett  down  in  his  accustomed 
place,  those  of  the  Counsel  of  Estate  sate  nexte  him  on  both 
hands  excepte  onely  the  Secretary  then  appointed  Speaker,  who 
sate  right  before  him,  John  Twine,  the  clerk  of  the  General 
Assembly,  being  placed  nexte  the  Speaker,  and  Thomas  Pierse, 
the  Sergeant,  standing  at  the  barre,  to  be  ready  for  any  service 
the  Assembly  shoulde  comand  him.  But  forasmuche  as  men's 
affaires  doe  little  prosper  where  God's  service  is  neglected,  all 
the  Burgesses  tooke  their  places  in  the  Quire  till  a  prayer  was 
said  by  Mr.  Bucke,  the  Minister.  .  .  .  Prayer  being 
ended,  ...  all  the  Burgesses  were  intreatted  to  retyre  them- 
selves into  the  body  of  the  Churche,  which  being  done,  before 
they  were  fully  admitted,  they  were  called  in  order  and  by 
name,  and  so  every  man  tooke  the  oathe  of  Supremacy  and 
entered  the  Assembly."^® 

The  body  at  once  claimed  and  made  good  its  right  to  exclude 
Burgesses  who  they  thought  were  not  entitled  to  seats.  The 
Speaker  himself  raised  an  objection  to  admitting  the  represen- 
tatives of  Warde's  plantation,  because  that  settlement  had 
been  made  without  a  commission  from  the  London  Company. 
But  Captain  Warde  promised  to  secure  a  patent  as  soon  as 
possible,  and  the  objection  was  waived.  The  Assembly  re- 
fused absolutely,  however,  to  seat  the  Burgesses  from  Martin's 
Hundred.  Captain  Martin  had  been  one  of  the  first  Council 
for  Virginia,  and  as  a  reward  for  his  long  services  had  been 

^  Nar.  of  Va.,  pp.  249,  250.  ^  Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  251. 


38  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

granted  privileges  that  rendered  him  almost  independent  of 
the  government  at  Jamestown.  He  was  summoned  before 
the  Assembly  and  requested  to  relinquish  these  extraordinary- 
rights,  but  he  refused  to  do  so.  "I  hold  my  patent,"  he  said, 
"for  my  service  don,  which  noe  newe  or  late  comer  can  meritt 
or  challenge.  "^^  So  the  Assembly,  feeling  that  it  would  be 
mockery  to  permit  the  Burgesses  from  Martin's  Hundred  to 
assist  in  the  making  of  laws  which  their  own  constituents, 
because  of  their  especial  charter,  might  with  impunity  disobey, 
refused  to  admit  them.^^ 

The  legislative  powers  granted  the  Virginia  Assembly  in 
the  Magna  Charta,  and  continued  with  slight  alterations  after 
the  revocation  of  the  charter  of  the  London  Company,  were 
very  extensive.  The  Assembly  could  pass  laws  dealing  with  a 
vast  variety  of  matters  appertaining  to  the  safety  and  welfare 
of  the  colony.  Statutes  were  enacted  in  the  session  of  1619 
touching  upon  Indian  affairs,  the  Church,  land  patents,  the 
relations  of  servants  and  landlords,  the  planting  of  crops,  gen- 
eral morality  in  Virginia,  the  price  of  tobacco,  foreign  trade, 
etc.  The  collected  laws  of  the  entire  colonial  period  fill  many 
volumes,  and  cover  a  vast  variety  of  subjects.  But  there  were 
three  things  which  limited  strictly  the  Assembly's  field  of 
action.  They  must  pass  no  statutes  contravening  first,  the 
laws  of  England;  secondly,  the  charters;  thirdly,  the  instruc- 
tions sent  them  by  the  London  Company.  When  the  colony 
passed  into  the  hands  of  the  King,  all  statutes  were  forbidden 
that  conflicted  with  the  charters,  or  with  the  instructions  of  the 
Crown.  These  restrictions  lasted  during  the  entire  colonial 
period,  but  they  were  not  always  carefully  regarded.  The 
Company,  and  later  the  King,  retained  two  ways  of  nullifying 
legislation  which  was  unauthorized,  or  was  distasteful  to  them. 
First,  there  was  the  veto  of  the  Governor.  As  the  guardian 
of  the  interests  of  England  and  his  monarch,  this  officer  could 
block  all  legislation.  Secondly,  the  Company,  and  later  the 
King,  could  veto  laws  even  though  the  Governor  had  consented 
to  them. 

»F.  R.,  p.  317. 

•"  Nar.  of  Va.,  pp.  252,  253,  254,  255,  260,  261. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  39 

But  the  most  important  power  exercised  by  the  Assembly 
was  its  control  over  taxation  in  Virginia.  In  the  very  first 
session  it  made  use  of  this  privilege  by  ordering,  i'That  every 
man  and  manservant  of  above  i6  years  of  age  shall  pay  into 
the  handes  and  Custody  of  the  Burgesses  of  every  Incorpora- 
tion and  plantation  one  pound  of  the  best  Tobacco". ^^  The 
<;^funds  thus  raised  were  utilized  for  the  payment  of  the  officers 
\)f  the  Assembly. 

The  levy  by  the  poll,  here  used,  was  continued  for  many 
years,  and  became  the  chief  support  of  the  government.  As 
the  colony  grew,  however,  and  the  need  for  greater  revenues 
was  felt,  customs  duties  and  other  forms  of  taxation  were 
resorted  to.  Large  sums  were  raised  by  an  export  duty  upon 
tobacco.  At  times  tariffs  were  placed  upon  the  importation  of 
liquors,  slaves  and  other  articles.  But  these  duties  had  to 
be  used  with  great  care,  for  the  carrying  of  the  colony  was 
done  chiefly  by  English  merchants,  and  Parliament  would  per- 
mit nothing  detrimental  to  their  interests. 

The  Assembly  claimed  the  exclusive  right  to  levy  general 
taxes.  The  Governor  and  Council  time  and  again  tried  to  wrest 
this  privilege  from  them,  but  never  with  success.^^  The  Bur- 
gesses, realizing  that  their  hold  upon  the  exchequer  was  the 
chief  source  of  their  power,  were  most  careful  never  to  relin- 
quish it.  From  time  to  time  the  Governors  sought  to  evade 
this  restraint  by  levying  taxes  under  the  guise  of  fees.  But 
this  expedient  invariably  excited  intense  irritation,  and  yielded 
a  revenue  so  small  that  most  Governors  thought  it  best  to 
avoid  it  entirely.  Of  more  importance  were  the  quit-rents,  a 
tax  on  land,  paid  to  the  King  by  all  freeholders.  But  this  was 
frequently  avoided,  and,  except  at  rare  intervals,  the  funds 
raised  by  it  were  left  in  Virginia  to  be  expended  for  local 
purposes.  The  greatest  blow  to  the  power  of  the  Burgesses 
was  struck  by  the  King  in  1680,  when  he  forced  through  the 
Assembly  a  law  granting  to  the  government  a  perpetual  income 

•^  Nar.  of  Va.,  p.  276. 

^  In  1662  the  Assembly  granted  power  to  the  Governor  and  Council 
for  three  years  to  levy  a  small  tax  by  the  poll.  The  county  taxes  for 
defraying  local  expenses,  were  assessed  and  collected  by  the  justices  of 
the  peace.    The  vestries  controlled  the  raising  of  the  parish  dues. 


40  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

'from  the  export  duty  on  tobacco.  This  revenue,  although  not 
large,  was  usually  sufficient  to  pay  the  Governor's  salary,  and 
thus  to  render  him  less  dependent  upon  the  Assembly.  Finally, 
it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  English  government,  although 
it  refrained  from  taxing  the  colony  directly,  imposed  an  enor- 
mous indirect  tax  by  means  of  a  tariff  upon  tobacco  brought 
into  England.  These  duties  were  collected  in  England,  but 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  incidence  of  the  tax  rested 
partly  upon  the  Virginia  planters.  Despite  these  various  duties, 
all  levied  without  its  consent,  the  Assembly  exercised  a  very 
real  control  over  taxation  in  Virginia,  and  used  it  as  an  effec- 
tive weapon  against  the  encroachments  of  the  Governors. 

From  the  very  first  the  General  Assembly  showed  itself  an 
energetic  and  determined  champion  of  the  rights  of  the  people. 
Time  and  again  it  braved  the  anger  of  the  Governor  and  of 
the  King  himself,  rather  than  yield  the  slightest  part  of  its 
privileges.  During  the  decade  preceding  the  English  Revolu- 
tion only  the  heroic  resistance  of  this  body  saved  the  liberal 
institutions  of  the  colony  from  destruction  at  the  hands  of 
Charles  II  and  James  II. 

The  General  Assembly  was  not  only  a  legislative  body,  it 
was  also  a  court  of  justice,  and  for  many  years  served  as  the 
highest  tribunal  of  the  colony.  The  judicial  function  was 
entrusted  to  a  joint  committee  from  the  two  houses,  whose 
recommendations  were  usually  accepted  without  question. 
Since  this  committee  invariably  contained  more  Burgesses  than 
Councillors,  the  supreme  court  was  practically  controlled  by 
the  representatives  of  the  people.  During  the  reign  of  Charles 
II,  however,  the  Assembly  was  deprived  of  this  function  by 
royal  proclamation,  and  the  judiciary  fell  almost  entirely  into 
the  hands  of  the  Governor  and  Council. 

The  General  Assembly  consisted  of  two  chambers — the 
House  of  Burgesses  and  the  Council.  In  the  early  sessions  the 
houses  sat  together  and  probably  voted  as  one  body.^^  Later, 
however,  they  were  divided  and  voted  separately.  The  Bur- 
gesses, as  time  went  on,  gradually  increased  in  numbers  until 
they  became  a  large  body,  but  the  Council  was  always  small. 

"Miller,  p.  41. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  41 

The  Councillors  were  royal  appointees.  But  since  the  King 
could  not  always  know  personally  the  prominent  men  of  the^ 
colony,  he  habitually  confirmed  without  question  the  nomina- 
tions of  the  Governor.  The  members  of  the  Council  were 
usually  persons  of  wealth,  influence  and  ability.  As  they  were 
subject  to  removal  by  the  King  and  invariably  held  one  or  more 
lucrative  governmental  offices,  it  was  customary  for  them  to 
display  great  servility  to  the  wishes  of  his  Majesty  or  of  the 
Governor.  It  was  very  unusual  for  them  to  oppose  in  the  As- 
sembly any  measure  recommended  by  the  King,  or  in  accord 
with  his  expressed  wishes.  Although  the  Councillors  were, 
with  rare  exceptions,  natives  of  Virginia,  they  were  in  no 
sense  representative  of  the  people  of  the  colony. 

As  the  upper  house  of  the  Assembly,  the  Council  exercised 
a  powerful  influence  upon  legislation.  After  the  separation  of 
the  chambers  their  consent  became  necessary  for  the  passage 
of  all  bills,  even  money  bills.  Their  legislative  influence  de- 
clined during  the  eighteenth  century,  however,  because  of  the 
growing  spirit  of  liberalism  in  Virginia,  and  the  increasing  size 
of  the  House  of  Burgesses. 

The  executive  powers  entrusted  to  the  Council  were  also  of 
very  great  importance.  The  Governor  was  compelled  by  his 
instructions  to  secure  its  assistance  and  consent  in  the  most 
important  matters.  And  since  the  chief  executive  was  always 
a  native  of  England,  and  often  entirely  ignorant  of  conditions 
in  the  colony,  he  was  constantly  forced  to  rely  upon  the  advice 
of  his  Council.  This  tendency  was  made  more  pronounced  by 
the  frequent  changes  of  Governors  that  marked  the  last  quarter 
of  the  seventeenth  century.  So  habitually  did  the  Council 
exercise  certain  functions,  not  legally  within  their  jurisdiction, 
that  they  began  to  claim  them  as  theirs  by  right.  And  the 
Governor  was  compelled  to  respect  these  claims  as  scrupulously 
as  the  King  of  England  respects  the  conventions  that  hedge 
in  and  limit  his  authority. 

Before  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  Council  had 
acquired  extraordinary  influence  in  the  government.  With 
the  right  to  initiate  and  to  block  legislation,  with  almost  com- 
plete control  over  the  judiciary,  with  great  influence  in  admin- 


42  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

istrative  matters,   it  threatened  to  become   an  oligarchy  of 
almost  unlimited  power. 

But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  influence  of  the  Council 
rendered  impotent  the  King's  Governor.  Great  powers  were 
lodged  in  the  hands  of  this  officer  by  his  various  instructions 
and  commissions.  He  was  commander  of  the  militia,  was  the 
head  of  the  colonial  church,  he  appointed  most  of  the  officers, 
attended  to  foreign  affairs,  and  put  the  laws  into  execution.  His 
influence,  however,  resulted  chiefly  from  the  fact  that  he  was 
the  representative  of  the  King.  In  the  days  of  Charles  I,  in 
the  Restoration  Period  and  under  James  11,  when  the  Stuarts 
were  combating  liberal  institutions,  both  in  England  and  in  the 
colonies,  the  Governor  exercised  a  powerful  and  dangerous 
control  over  affairs  in  Virginia.  But  after  the  English  Revo- 
lution his  power  declined.  As  the  people  of  England  no  longer 
dreaded  a  monarch  whose  authority  now  rested  solely  upon 
acts  of  Parliament,  so  the  Virginians  ceased  to  fear  his 
viceroy. 

The  powers  officially  vested  in  the  Governor  were  by  no 
means  solely  executive.  He  frequently  made  recommendations 
to  the  Assembly,  either  in  his  own  name  or  the  name  of  the 
King,  and  these  recommendations  at  times  assumed  the  nature 
of  commands.  H  the  Burgesses  were  reluctant  to  obey,  he 
had  numerous  weapons  at  hand  with  which  to  intimidate  them 
and  whip  them  into  line.  Unscrupulous  use  of  the  patronage 
and  threats  of  the  King's  dire  displeasure  were  frequently 
resorted  to.  The  Governor  presided  over  the  upper  house,  and 
voted  there  as  any  other  member.  Moreover,  he  could  veto 
all  bills,  even  those  u^n  which  he  had  voted  in  the  affirma- 
tive in  the  Council.  Ym^  he  had  a  large  influence  in  shaping  the 
laws  of  the  colony,  and  an  absolute  power  to  block  all 
I  legislation. 

Such,  in  outline,  was  the  government  originated  for  Vir- 
ginia by  the  liberal  leaders  of  the  London  Company,  and  put 
into  operation  by  Sir  George  Yeardley.  I^  lasted,  with  the 
short  intermission  of  the  Commonwealth  Period,  for  more 
than  one  hundred  and  fifty  years,  and  under  it  Virginia  became 
the  most  populous  and  wealthy  of  the  English  colonies  in 
America. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  43 

The  successful  cultivation  of  tobacco  in  Virginia,  as  we 
have  seen,  put  new  life  into  the  discouraged  London  Company. 
The  shareholders,  feeling  that  now  at  last  the  colony  would 
grow  and  prosper,  exerted  themselves  to  the  utmost  to  secure 
desirable  settlers  and  to  equip  them  properly.  Soon  fleets  of 
considerable  size  were  leaving  the  English  ports  for  America, 
their  decks  and  cabins  crowded  with  emigrants  and  their  holds 
laden  with  clothing,  arms  and  farming  implements.^*  During 
the  months  from  March  1620  to  March  1621  ten  ships  sailed, 
carrying  no  less  than  1051  persons.^^  In  the  year  ending 
March,  1622,  seventeen  ships  reached  Virginia,  bringing  over 
fifteen  hundred  new  settlers.^*  And  this  stream  continued 
without  abatement  until  1624,  when  disasters  in  Virginia, 
quarrels  among  the  shareholders  and  the  hostility  of  the  King 
brought  discouragement  to  the  Company.  In  all,  there  reached 
the  colony  from  November,  161 9,  to  February,  1625,  nearly 
five  thousand  men,  women  and  children.^"^ 

Although  tobacco  culture  was  the  only  enterprise  of  the 
colony  which  had  yielded  a  profit,  it  was  not  the  design  of 
Sandys  and  his  friends  that  that  plant  should  monopolize  the 
energies  of  the  settlers.  They  hoped  to  make  Virginia  an 
industrial  community,  capable  of  furnishing  the  mother  coun- 
try with  various  manufactured  articles,  then  imported  from 
foreign  countries.  Especially  anxious  were  they  to  render 
England  independent  in  their  supply  of  pig  iron.  Ore  having 
been  discovered  a  few  miles  above  Henrico  on  the  James,  a 
furnace  was  erected  there  and  more  than  a  hundred  skilled 
workmen  brought  over  from  England  to  put  it  into  operation. 
Before  the  works  could  be  completed,  however,  they  were 
utterly  demolished  by  the  savages,  the  machinery  thrown  into 
the  river,  all  the  workmen  slaughtered,^^  and  the  only  return 
the  Company  obtained  for  an  outlay  of  thousands  of  pounds 
was  a  shovel,  a  pair  of  tongs  and  one  bar  of  iron.^^  Efforts 
were  made  later  to  repair  the  havoc  wrought  by  the  Indians 
and  to  reestablish  the  works,  but  they  came  to  nothing.     Not 

•*F.  R.,  p.  376.  «F.  R.,p.  415. 

'*F.  R.,  p.  464.  "F.  R.,  p.  612. 

"Bruce,  Ec.  Hist,  Vol.  II,  pp.  448,  449. 
"Ibid. 


44  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

until  the  time  of  Governor  Spotswood  were  iron  furnaces 
operated  in  Virginia,  and  even  then  the  industry  met  with 
a  scant  measure  of  success. 

The  Company  also  made  an  earnest  effort  to  promote  the 
manufacture  of  glass  in  Virginia.  This  industry  was  threat- 
ened with  extinction  in  England  as  a  result  of  the  great  inroads 
that  had  been  made  upon  the  timber  available  for  fuel,  and 
it  was  thought  that  Virginia,  with  its  inexhaustible  forests, 
offered  an  excellent  opportunity  for  its  rehabilitation.  But 
here  too  they  were  disappointed.  The  sand  of  Virginia  proved 
unsuitable  for  the  manufacture  of  glass.  The  skilled  Italian 
artisans  sent  over  to  put  the  works  into  operation  were  in- 
tractable and  mutinous.  After  trying  in  various  ways  to  dis- 
courage the  enterprise,  so  that  they  could  return  to  Europe, 
these  men  brought  matters  to  a  close  by  cracking  the  furnace 
with  a  crowbar.  George  Sandys,  in  anger,  declared  "that 
a  more  damned  crew  hell  never  vomited".^*^ 

In  order  to  show  that  they  were  sincere  in  their  professions 
of  interest  in  the  spiritual  welfare  of  the  Indians,  the  Company 
determined  to  erect  a  college  at  Henrico. "for  the  training  up 
of  the  children  of  those  Infidels  in  true  Religion,  moral  virtue 
and  civility". ^^  The  clergy  of  England  were  enthusiastic 
in  their  support  of  this  good  design,  and  their  efforts  resulted 
in  liberal  contributions  from  various  parts  of  the  kingdom.*^ 
Unfortunately,  however,  the  money  thus  secured  was  expended 
in  sending  to  the  college  lands  a  number  of  "tenants"  the 
income  from  whose  labor  was  to  be  utilized  in  establishing 
and  supporting  the  institution.'*^  As  some  of  these  settlers 
fell  victims  to  disease  and  many  others  were  destroyed  in  the 
massacre  of  1622,  the  undertaking  had  to  be  abandoned,  and 
of  course  all  thought  of  converting  and  civilizing  the  savages 
was  given  up  during  the  long  and  relentless  war  that  ensued. 

Even  more  discouraging  than  these  failures  was  the  hostility 
of  the  King  to  the  cultivation  of  tobacco  in  Virginia,  and  his 
restrictions  upon  its  importation  into  England.     Appeals  were 

*•  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist,  Vol.  II,  pp.  442,  443. 

"F.  R.,  p.  322.  "F.  R.,  p.  335. 

"F.  R.,  p.336. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  45 

made  to  him  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  Spanish  tobacco,  in  order 
that  the  Virginia  planters  might  dispose  of  their  product  at  a 
greater  profit.  This,  it  was  argued,  would  be  the  most  effec- 
tive way  of  rendering  the  colony  prosperous  and  self  sustaining. 
But  James,  who  was  still  bent  upon  maintaining  his  Spanish 
policy,  would  not  offend  Philip  by  excluding  his  tobacco  from 
England.  Moreover,  in  1621,  he  issued  a  proclamation  re- 
stricting the  importation  of  the  leaf  from  Virginia  and  the' 
Somers  Isles  to  fifty-five  thousand  pounds  annually.^^  This 
measure  created  consternation  in  Virginia  and  in  the  London 
Company.  The  great  damage  it  would  cause  to  the  colony 
and  the  diminution  in  the  royal  revenue  that  would  result  were 
pointed  out  to  James,  but  for  the  time  he  was  obdurate.^^  In- 
deed, he  caused  additional  distress  by  granting  the  customs 
upon  tobacco  to  a  small  association  of  farmers  of  the 
revenue,  who  greatly  damaged  the  interests  of  the  colony.  In 
1622,  James,  realizing  that  his  policy  in  regard  to  tobacco  was 
injuring  the  exchequer,  made  a  compromise  with  the  Company. 
The  King  agreed  to  restrict  the  importation  of  Spanish  to- 
bacco to  60,000  pounds  a  year,  and  after  two  years  to  exclude 
it  entirely.  All  the  Virginia  leaf  was  to  be  admitted,  but  the 
Crown  was  to  receive  one  third  of  the  crop,  while  the  other 
two  thirds  was  subjected  to  a  duty  of  six  pence  a  pound.**^ 
This  agreement  proved  most  injurious  to  the  Company,  and  it 
was  soon  abandoned,  but  the  heavy  exactions  of  the  King  con- 
tinued. Undoubtedly  this  unwise  policy  was  most  detrimental 
to  Virginia.  Not  only  did  it  diminish  the  returns  of  the  Com- 
pany and  make  it  impossible  for  Sandys  to  perfect  all  his  wise 
plans  for  the  colony,  but  it  put  a  decided  check  upon  immi- 
gration. Many  that  would  have  gone  to  Virginia  to  share  in 
the  profits  of  the  planters,  remained  at  home  when  they  saw 
that  these  profits  were  being  confiscated  by  the  King.^'^ 

Yet  the  strenuous  efforts  of  the  London  Company  would 
surely  have  brought  something  like  prosperity  to  the  colony 
had  not  an  old  enemy  returned  to  cause  the  destruction  of  hun- 
dreds of  the  settlers.    This  was  the  sickness.    For  some  years 

**  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  264.       "  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  265. 
*•  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  269.        -'  P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-3. 


46  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

the  mortality  had  been  very  low,  because  the  old  planters  were 
acclimated,  and  few  new  immigrants  were  coming  to  Virginia. 
But  with  the  stream  of  laborers  and  artisans  that  the  Sandys 
regime  now  sent  over,  the  scourge  appeared  again  with  re- 
doubled fury.  As  early  as  January,  1620,  Governor  Yeardley 
wrote  "of  the  great  mortallitie  which  hath  been  in  Virginia, 
about  300  of  ye  inhabitants  having  dyed  this  year".^®  The 
sickness  was  most  deadly  in  the  newly  settled  parts  of  the 
colony,  "to  the  consumption  of  divers  Hundreds,  and  almost  the 
utter  destruction  of  some  particular  Plantations".^^  The  Lon- 
don Company,  distressed  at  the  loss  of  so  many  men,  saw  in 
their  misfortunes  the  hand  of  God,  and  wrote  urging  "the 
more  carefull  observations  of  his  holy  laws  to  work  a  recon- 
ciliation".^'^ They  also  sent  directions  for  the  construction,  in 
different  parts  of  the  colony,  of  four  guest  houses,  or  hospitals, 
for  the  lodging  and  entertaining  of  fifty  persons  each,  upon 
their  first  arrival.^  ^  But  all  efforts  to  check  the  scourge  proved 
fruitless.  In  the  year  ending  March,  1621  over  a  thousand  per- 
sons died  upon  the  immigrant  vessels  and  in  Virginia.^^  De- 
spite the  fact  that  hundreds  of  settlers  came  to  the  colony 
during  this  year,  the  population  actually  declined.  In  1621 
the  percentage  of  mortality  was  not  so  large,  but  the  actual 
number  of  deaths  increased.  During  the  months  from  March, 
1 62 1,  to  March,  1622,  nearly  twelve  hundred  persons  perished. 
It  was  like  condemning  a  man  to  death  to  send  him  to  the 
colony.  Seventy-five  or  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  laborers  that 
left  England  in  search  of  new  homes  across  the  Atlantic  died 
before  the  expiration  of  their  first  year.  The  exact  number 
of  deaths  in  1622  is  not  known,  but  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that  it  approximated  thirteen  hundred.^^  Mr.  George  Sandys, 
brother  of  the  Secretary  of  the  London  Company,  wrote,  "Such 
a  pestilent  fever  rageth  this  winter  amongst  us :  never  knowne 
before  in  Virginia,  by  the  infected  people  that  came  over  in 
ye  Abigail,  who  were  poisoned  with  .  .  .  beer  and  all  falling 
sick  &  many  dying,  every  where  dispersed  the  contagion,  and 

"F.  R.,  p.  372.  "F.  R.,  p.  377. 

«F.  R.,  p.  377.  "F.R.,  p.  377. 

"F.  R.,  p.  415.  "F.  R.,  p.  S06. 


J 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  47 

the  forerunning  Summer  hath  been  also  deadly  upon  us."^* 
Not  until  1624  did  the  mortality  decline.  Then  it  was  that 
the  Governor  wrote,  "This  summer,  God  be  thanked,  the 
Colony  hath  very  well  stood  to  health".^^  The  dread  sickness 
had  spent  itself  for  lack  of  new  victims,  for  the  immigration 
had  declined  and  the  old  planters  had  become  "seasoned". 

History  does  not  record  an  epidemic  more  deadly  than  that 
which  swept  over  Virginia  during  these  years.  It  is  estimated 
that  the  number  of  those  that  lost  their  lives  from  the  diseases 
native  to  the  colony  and  to  those  brought  in  from  the  infected 
ships  amounts  to  no  less  than  four  thousand.^  ^  When  the  tide 
of  immigration  was  started  by  Sir  Edwin  Sandys  in  161 9, 
there  were  living  in  Virginia  about  nine  hundred  persons; 
when  it  slackened  in  1624  the  population  was  but  eleven  hun- 
dred. The  sending  of  nearly  five  thousand  settlers  to  Vir- 
ginia had  resulted  in  a  gain  of  but  two  hundred.  It  is  true 
that  the  tomahawk  and  starvation  accounts  for  a  part  of  this 
mortality,  but  by  far  the  larger  number  of  deaths  was  due 
to  disease. 

Yet  hardly  less  horrible  than  the  sickness  was  the  Indian 
massacre  of  1622.  This  disaster,  which  cost  the  lives  of  sev- 
eral hundred  persons,  struck  terror  into  the  hearts  of  every 
Englishman  in  Virginia.  The  colonists  had  not  the  least  inti- 
mation tliat  the  savages  meditated  harm  to  them,  for  peace  had 
existed  between  the  races  ever  since  the  marriage  of  Rolfe 
and  Pocahontas.  Considering  the  protection  of  their  palisades 
no  longer  necessary  after  that  event,  they  had  spread  out  over 
the  colony  in  search  of  the  most  fertile  lands.  Their  planta- 
tions extended  at  intervals  for  many  miles  along  both  banks 
of  the  James,  and  in  the  case  of  a  sudden  attack  by  the  Indians 
it  would  obviously  be  difficult  for  the  settlers  to  defend  them- 
selves or  to  offer  assistance  to  their  neighbors. 

The  apparent  friendship  of  the  Indians  had  created  such 
great  intimacy  between  the  two  races,  that  the  savages  were 
received  into  the  homes  of  the  white  men  and  at  times  were 
fed  at  their  tables.^'^    At  the  command  of  the  London  Company 

"F.  R.,  p.  506.  «F.  R.,  p.  608. 

"•P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-37.  "Stith,  p.  210.- 


48  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

itself  some  of  the  Indian  youths  had  been  adopted  by  the 
settlers  and  were  being  educated  in  the  Christian  faith.  So' 
unsuspecting  were  the  people  that  they  loaned  the  savages  their 
boats,  as  they  passed  backward  and  forward,  to  formulate  their 
plans  for  the  massacre.^* 

The  plot  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  cunning  brain  of 
Opechancanough.  This  chief,  always  hostile  to  the  white  men, 
must  have  viewed  with  apprehension  their  encroachment  upon 
the  lands  of  his  people.  He  could  but  realize  that  some  day  the 
swarms  of  foreigners  that  were  arriving  each  year  would  ex- 
clude the  Indians  from  the  country  of  their  forefathers.  Per- 
ceiving his  opportunity  in  the  foolish  security  of  the  English 
and  in  their  exposed  situation,  he  determined  to  annihilate 
them  in  one  general  butchery. 

His  plans  were  laid  with  great  cunning.  Although  thous- 
ands of  natives  knew  of  the  design,  no  warning  reached  the 
white  men  until  the  very  eve  of  the  massacre.  While  Opechan- 
canough was  preparing  this  tremendous  blow,  he  protested  in 
the  strongest  terms  his  ]>erpetual  good  will  and  love,  declar- 
ing that  the  sky  would  fall  before  he  would  bring  an  end  to 
the  peace.^^  In  order  to  lull  the  suspicions  of  the  planters, 
"even  but  two  daies  before  the  massacre",  he  guided  some  of 
them  "with  much  kindnesse  through  the  woods,  and  one 
Browne  that  lived  among  them  to  learne  the  language",  he 
sent  home  to  his  master.  The  evening  before  the  attack  the 
Indians  came  as  usual  to  the  plantations  with  deer,  turkeys, 
fish,  fruits  and  other  provisions  to  sell.^^ 

That  night,  however,  a  warning  was  received,  which  although 
too  late  to  save  the  most  remote  settlements,  preserved  many 
hundreds  from  the  tomahawk.  Chanco,  an  Indian  boy  who 
had  been  adopted  by  an  Englishman  named  Race,  revealed  the 
entire  plot  to  his  master.  The  man  secured  his  house,  and 
rowed  away  before  dawn  in  desperate  haste  to  Jamestown,  to 
give  warning  to  the  Governor.  "Whereby  they  were  pre- 
vented, and  at  such  other  plantations  as  possibly  intelligence 
could  be  given."^^ 

"  Stith,  p.  2IO.  •*  Arb.  Smith,  p.  573- 

*  Arb.  Smith,  p.  573.  "  Arb.  Smith,  p.  578. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  49 

The  assault  of  the  savages  was  swift  and  deadly.  In  all 
parts  of  the  colony  they  fell  upon  the  settlers,  and  those  that 
had  received  no  warning  were,  in  most  cases,  butchered  be- 
fore they  could  suspect  that  harm  was  intended.  Sometimes 
the  Indians  sat  down  to  breakfast  with  their  victims,  "whom 
immediately  with  their  owne  tooles  they  slew  most  barbarously, 
not  sparing  either  age  or  sex,  man  woman  or  childe".^^  Many 
were  slain  while  working  in  the  fields ;  others  were  trapped  in 
their  houses  and  butchered  before  they  could  seize  their  wea- 
pons. The  savages,  "not  being  content  with  their  lives,  .  .  . 
fell  againe  upon  the  dead  bodies,  making  as  well  as  they  could 
a  fresh  murder,  defacing,  dragging,  and  mangling  their  dead 
carkases  into  many  peeces".®^ 

That  the  plot  was  so  successful  was  due  to  the  completeness 
of  the  surprise,  for  where  the  English  made  the  least  resistance 
the  savages  were  usually  beaten  off.  A  planter  named  Causie, 
when  attacked  and  wounded  and  surrounded  by  the  Indians, 
"with  an  axe  did  cleave  one  of  their  heads,  whereby  the  rest 
fled  and  he  escaped ;  for  they  hurt  not  any  that  did  either  fight 
or  stand  upon  their  guard.  In  one  place  where  they  had  warn- 
ing of  it,  (they)  defended  the  house  against  sixty  or  more  that 
assaulted  it."^^ 

At  the  plantation  of  a  Mr.  Harrison,  where  there  were 
gathered  seven  men  and  eighteen  or  nineteen  women  and  chil- 
dren, the  savages  set  fire  to  a  tobacco  house  and  then  came  in 
to  tell  the  men  to  quench  it.  Six  of  the  English,  not  suspecting 
treachery,  rushed  out,  and  were  shot  full  of  arrows.  Mr. 
Thomas  Hamor,  the  seventh  man,  "having  finished  a  letter  he 
was  writing,  followed  after  to  see  what  was  the  matter,  but 
quickly  they  shot  an  arrow  in  his  back,  which  caused  him  to 
returne  and  barricado  up  the  dores,  whereupon  the  Salvages 
set  fire  to  the  house.  But  a  boy,  seizing  a  gun  which  he  found 
loaded,  discharged  it  at  random.  At  the  bare  report  the  enemy 
fled  and  Mr.  Hamor  with  the  women  and  children  escaped."^^ 
In  a  nearby  house,  a  party  of  English  under  Mr.  Hamor's 
brother,  were  caught  by  the  Indians  without  arms,  but  they 

"'  Arb.  Smith,  p.  573.  **  Arb.  Smith,  p.  574. 

"  Arb.  Smith,  p.  575.  "  Arb.  Smith,  p.  576. 


50  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

defended  themselves  successfully  with  spades,  axes  and 
brickbats.** 

One  of  the  first  to  fall  was  Reverend  George  Thorpe,  a 
member  of  the  Virginia  Council,  and  a  man  of  prominence  in 
England.^^  Leaving  a  life  of  honor  and  ease,  he  had  come  to 
Virginia  to  work  for  the  conversion  of  the  Indians.  He  "had 
apparently  won  the  favor  of  Opechancanough,  with  whom  he 
often  discoursed  upon  the  Christian  religion.  At  the  moment 
of  his  murder,  his  servant,  perceiving  the  deadly  intent  of  the 
savages,  gave  him  warning,  but  his  gentle  nature  would  not 
permit  him  to  believe  harm  of  those  whom  he  had  always  be- 
friended, and  he  was  cut  down  without  resistance.^® 

The  barbarous  king  failed  in  his  design  to  destroy  the  Eng- 
lish race  in  Virginia,  but  the  massacre  was  a  deadly  blow  to 
the  colony.  No  less  than  three  hundred  and  fifty-seven  persons 
were  slaughtered,  including  six  Councillors.  The  news  of  the 
disaster  brought  dismay  to  the  London  Company,  For  a  while 
they  attempted  to  keep  the  matter  a  secret,  but  in  a  few  weeks 
it  was  known  all  over  England.  Although  the  massacre  could 
not  have  been  foreseen  or  prevented,  it  served  as  a  pretext  for 
numerous  attacks  upon  Sandys  and  the  party  which  supported 
him.  It  discouraged  many  shareholders  and  made  it  harder  to 
secure  settlers  for  the  colony.  Even  worse  was  the  effect  in 
Virginia.  The  system  of  farming  in  unprotected  plantations, 
which  had  prevailed  for  some  years,  had  now  to  be  abandoned 
and  many  settlements  that  were  exposed  to  the  Indians  were 
deserted.  "We  have  not,"  wrote  the  Assembly,  "the  safe 
range  of  the  Country  for  the  increase  of  Cattle,  Swyne,  etc; 
nor  for  the  game  and  f owle  which  the  country  affords  in  great 
plentye ;  besides  our  duties  to  watch  and  warde  to  secure  our- 
selves and  labor  are  as  hard  and  chargeable  as  if  the  enemy 
were  at  all  times  present."^® 

The  massacre  was  followed  by  a  venomous  war  with  the  In- 
dians, which  lasted  many  years.  The  English,  feeling  that 
their  families  and  their  homes  would  never  be  safe  so  long  as 
the  savages  shared  the  country  with  them,  deliberately  planned 

••Arb.  Smith,  p.  576.  •"  Stith,  p.  211. 

"Stith,  pp.  211,  212.  "F.  R.,  pp.  576,  577. 


REPRESENTAfTIVE  GOVERNMENT  >       51 

the  extermination  of  all  hostile  tribes  in  Virginia.  Their  con- 
version was  given  no  further  consideration.  "The  terms 
betwixt  us  and  them,"  they  declared,  "are  irreconcilable."'^^ 
Governor  Wyatt  wrote,  "All  trade  with  them  must  be  for- 
bidden, and  without  doubt  either  we  must  cleere  them  or  they 
us  out  of  the  Country."'''^ 

But  it  soon  became  apparent  that  neither  people  would  be 
able  to  win  an  immediate  or  decisive  victory.  The  Indians 
could  not  hope  to  destroy  the  English,  now  that  their  deeply 
laid  plot  had  failed.  In  open  battle  their  light  arrows  made  no 
impression  upon  the  coats  of  plate  and  of  mail  in  which  the 
white  men  were  incased,  while  their  own  bodies  were  without 
protection  against  the  superior  weapons  of  their  foes.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  was  very  difficult  for  the  colonists  to  strike  the 
savages,  because  of  the  "advantages  of  the  wood  and  the  nim- 
bleness  of  their  heels". ''^  Even  though  they  "chased  them  to 
and  fro",  following  them  to  their  villages  and  burning  their 
huts,  they  found  it  very  difficult  to  do  them  serious  harm. 

Finally  the  English  hit  upon  the  plan  of  bringing  distress 
upon  the  savages  by  destroying  their  com.  Although  the 
Virginia  tribes  subsisted  partly  upon  game,  their  chief  support 
was  from  their  fields  of  maize,  and  the  entire  failure  of  their 
crop  would  have  reduced  hundreds  of  them  to  the  verge  of 
starvation. '^^  Each  year  the  white  men,  in  small  companies,  in 
various  parts  of  the  country,  brought  ruin  to  the  corn  fields. 
Sometimes  the  savages,  in  despair  at  the  prospect  of  famine, 
made  valiant  efforts  to  defend  their  fields,  but  were  invariably 
beaten  off  until  the  work  of  destruction  was  done. 

The  natives  retaliated  with  many  sudden  raids  upon  the  more 
exposed  parts  of  the  colony,  where  they  burned,  pillaged  and 
murdered.  The  planter  at  work  in  his  fields  might  expect  to 
find  them  lurking  in  the  high  grass,  while  their  ambushes  in 
the  woods  made  communication  from  plantation  to  plantation 
very  dangerous.  "The  harmes  that  they  do  us,"  wrote  the 
Assembly,  "is  by  ambushes  and  sudden  incursions,  where  they 

^»F.  R.,  p.  576.  •  "F.  R.,  p.  508. 

"F.  R.,  p.  576. 

"Bruce,  Ec.  Hist,  Vol.  I,  pp.  155  to  159. 


52  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

see  their  advantages."'^*  In  1625  Captain  John  Harvey  de- 
clared that  the  two  races  were  "ingaged  in  a  mortall  warre 
and  fleshed  in  each  others  bloud,  of  which  the  Causes  have 
been  the  late  massacre  on  the  Salvages  parte.  ...  I  conceive 
that  by  the  dispersion  of  the  Plantations  the  Salvages  hath  the 
advantage  in  this  warre,  and  that  by  their  suddaine  assaults 
they  do  us  more  harme  than  we  do  them  by  our  set  voyages". '^^ 

When  the  English  had  recovered  froni  the  first  shock  of 
the  massacre,  they  planned  four  expeditions  against  the  tribes 
living  on  the  river  above  Jamestown.  Mr.  George  Sandys 
attacked  the  Tappahatomaks,.  Sir  George  Yeardley  the  Wya- 
nokes.  Captain  William  Powell  the  Chickahominies  and  the 
Appomatocks,  and  Captain  John  West  the  Tanx-Powhatans. 
The  savages,  without  attempting  to  make  a  stand,  deserted 
their  villages  and  their  crops  and  fled  at  the  approach  of  the 
English.  Few  were  killed,  for  they  were  "so  light  and  swift" 
that  the  white  men,  laden  with  their  heavy  armor,  could  not 
overtake  them.'^^  In  the  fall  Sir  George  Yeardley  led  three 
hundred  men  down  the  river  against  the  Nansemonds  and 
against  Opechancanough.  The  natives  "set  fire  to  their  own 
houses,  and  spoiled  what  they  could,  and  then  fled  with  what 
they  could  carry;  so  that  the  English  did  make  no  slaughter 
amongst  them  for  revenge.  Their  Corne  fields  being  newly 
gathered,  they  surprised  all  they  found,  burnt  the  houses  (that) 
remained  unburnt,  and  so  departed."^''' 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  colonists  could  continue  this  war 
while  the  sickness  was  raging  among  them.  At  the  very  time 
that  Yeardley  was  fighting  Opechancanough,  hundreds  of  his 
comrades  were  dying  "like  cats  and  dogs".  "With  our  small 
and  sicklie  forces,"  wrote  Mr.  George  Sandys,  "we  have  dis- 
comforted the  Indians  round  about  us,  burnt  their  houses, 
gathered  their  corn  and  slain  not  a  few;  though  they  are  as 
swift  as  Roebucks,  like  the  violent  lightening  they  are  gone  as 
soon  as  perceived,  and  not  to  be  destroyed  but  by  surprise  or 
famine."'^^ 

"F.  R.,  p.  576.  "F.  R.,  p.  611. 

"Arb.  Smith,  p.  594. 

"Arb.  Smith,  p.  559;  F.  R.,  pp.  475,  495- 

"F.  R.,  p.  510. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  53 

How  bitter  was  the  war  is  shown  by  an  act  of  treachery  by 
the  EngHsh  that  would  have  shamed  the  savages  themselves. 
In  1623,  the  Indians,  discouraged  by  the  destruction  of  their 
crops,  sent  messengers  to  Jamestown,  asking  for  peace.  The 
colonists  determined  to  take  advantage  of  this  overture  to 
recover  their  prisoners  and  at  the  same  time  to  strike  a  sudden 
blow  at  their  enemy.  Early  in  June,  Captain  William  Tucker 
with  twelve  well  armed  men  was  sent  "in  a  shalope  under 
colour  to  make  peace  with  them".  On  the  arrival  of  this  party 
at  the  chief  town  of  Opechancanough,  the  savages  thronged 
down  to  the  riverside  to  parley  with  them,  but  the  English 
refused  to  consider  any  terms  until  all  prisoners  had  been  re- 
stored. Assenting  to  this,  the  savages  brought  forth  seven 
whites  and  they  were  placed  aboard  the  vessel.  Having  thus 
accomplished  their  purpose,  the  soldiers,  at  a  given  signal,  let 
fly  a  volley  into  the  midst  of  the  crowd,  killing  "some  40  In- 
dians including  3  of  the  chiefest"."^® 

In  1624  the  English  won  a  great  victory  over  the  most 
troublesome  of  the  Indian  tribes,  the  Pamunkeys.  Governor 
Wyatt,  in  leading  an  expedition  against  this  people  had  evi- 
dently expected  little  resistance,  for  he  brought  with  him  but 
sixty  fighting  men.  The  Pamunkeys,  however,  had  planted  that 
year  a  very  large  crop  of  corn,  which  they  needed  for  the 
support  of  themselves  and  their  confederates,  and  they  deter- 
mined to  protect  it  at  all  hazards.  So  Wyatt  and  his  little 
band  were  surprised,  on  approaching  their  village  to  find  before 
them  more  than  eight  hundred  warriors  prepared  for  battle. 
The  English  did  not  falter  in  the  face  of  this  army,  and  a 
fierce  contest  ensued.  "Fightinge  not  only  for  safeguards  of 
their  houses  and  such  a  huge  quantity  of  corn",  but  for  their 
reputation  with  the  other  nations,  the  Pamunkeys  displayed  un- 
usual bravery.  For  two  days  the  battle  went  on.  Whenever 
the  young  warriors  wavered  before  the  volleys  of  musketry, 
they  were  driven  back  into  the  fight  by  the  older  men.  Twenty- 
four  of  the  English  were  detached  from  the  firing  line  and 
were  employed  in  destroying  the  maize.  In  this  they  were  so 
successful  that  enough  corn  was  cut  down  "as  by  Estimation 

"F.  R.,  pp.  514,  515. 


54  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

of  men  of  good  judgment  was  sufficient  to  have  sustained 
fower  thousand  men  for  a  twelvemonth".  At  last  the  savages 
in  despair  gave  up  the  fight  and  stood  nearby  "rufully  look- 
inge  on  whilst  their  Corne  was  cutt  down".  "In  this  Expedi- 
tion," wrote  the  colonists,  "sixteene  of  the  English  were  hurte 
our  first  and  seconde  day,  whereby  nyne  of  the  best  shott  were 
made  unserviceable  for  that  tyme,  yett  never  a  man  slayne, 
nor  none  miscarried  of  those  hurtes,  Since  when  they  have 
not  greatly  troubled  us,  nor  interrupted  our  labours."®^ 

The  series  of  misfortunes  which  befel  the  London  Company 
during  the  administration  of  Sir  Edwin  Sandys  culminated  in 
the  loss  of  their  charter.  For  some  time  King  James  had  been 
growing  more  and  more  hostile  to  the  party  that  had  assumed 
control  of  the  colony.  It  is  highly  probable  that  he  had  had 
no  intimation,  when  the  charter  of  1612  was  granted,  that 
popular  institutions  would  be  established  in  Virginia,  and  the 
extension  of  the  English  parliamentary  system  to  America 
must  have  been  distasteful  to  him.  The  enemies  of  Sandys 
had  been  whispering  to  the  King  that  he  "aymed  at  nothing 
more  than  to  make  a  free  popular  state  there,  and  himselfe 
and  his  assured  friends  to  be  the  leaders  of  them".®^  James 
knew  that  Sandys  was  not  friendly  to  the  prerogative  of  the 
Crown.  It  had  been  stated  "that  there  was  not  any  man  in 
the  world  that  carried  a  more  malitious  heart  to  the  Govern- 
ment of  a  Monarchic".*^ 

In  1 62 1  the  controlling  party  in  the  London  Company  was 
preparing  a  new  charter  for  Virginia.  The  contents  of  this 
document  are  not  known,  but  it  is  exceedingly  probable  that 
it  was  intended  as  the  preface  to  the  establishment  of  a  gov- 
ernment in  the  colony  far  more  liberal  than  that  of  England 
itself.  It  was  proposed  to  have  the  charter  confirmed  by  act 
of  Parliament,  and  to  this  James  had  consented,  provided  it 
proved  satisfactory  to  the  Privy  Council.^^  But  it  is  evident 
that  when  the  Councillors  had  examined  it,  they  advised  the 
King  not  to  assent  to  it  or  to  allow  it  to  appear  in  Parliament. 
Indeed  the  document  must  have  stirred  James'  anger,  for  not 

*  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-3.  "  F.  R.,  p.  530. 

"F.  R.,  p.  529.  "FR.,  p.  393. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  55 

only  did  he  end  all  hopes  of  its  passage,  but  he  "struck  some 
terrour  into  most  undertakers  for  Virginia",  by  imprisoning 
Sir  Edwin  Sandys. ^^ 

Even  more  distasteful  to  the  King  than  the  establishment 
of  popular  institutions  in  the  little  colony  was  the  spreading 
of  liberal  doctrines  throughout  England  by  the  Sandys  faction 
of  the  Company.  James  could  no  longer  tolerate  their  meet- 
ings, if  once  he  began  to  look  upon  them  as  the  nursery  of 
discontent  and  sedition.  The  party  that  was  so  determined 
in  its  purpose  to  plant  a  republican  government  in  Virginia 
might  stop  at  nothing  to  accomplish  the  same  end  in  England. 
James  knew  that  national  politics  were  often  discussed  in  the 
assemblies  of  the  Company  and  that  the  parties  there  were 
sometimes  as  "animated  one  against  the  other"  as  had  been 
the  "Guelfs  and  Gebillines"  of  Italy.^^  He  decided  that  the 
best  way  to  end  these  controversies  and  frustrate  the  designs 
of  his  enemies  was  to  annul  the  charter  of  the  Company  and 
make  Virginia  a  royal  colony. 

The  first  unmistakable  sign  of  his  hostility  came  in  June 
1622,  when  he  interfered  with  the  election  of  their  treasurer. 
It  was  not,  he  told  them,  his  intention  "to  infringe  their  liberty 
of  free  election",  but  he  sent  a  list  of  names  that  would  be 
acceptable  to  him,  and  asked  them  to  put  one  of  these  in  nom- 
ination. To  this  the  Company  assented  readily  enough,  even 
nominating  two  from  the  list,  but  when  the  election  was  held, 
the  King's  candidates  were  overwhelmingly  defeated.*®  When 
James  heard  this,  he  "flung  himself  away  in  a  furious  passion", 
being  "not  well  satisfied  that  out  of  so  large  a  number  by  him 
recommended  they  had  not  made  any  choice". ^'^  The  incident 
meant  that  James  had  given  the  Company  an  unmistakable 
intimation  that  it  would  be  well  for  them  to  place  the  manage- 
ment of  affairs  in  the  hands  of  men  more  in  harmony  with 
himself,  and  that  they  had  scornfully  refused. 

The  Company  was  now  doomed,  for  the  King  decided  that 
the  charter  must  be  revoked.  He  could  not,  of  course,  annul  a 
grant  that  had  passed  under  the  Great  Seal,  without  some  pre- 

"  F.  R.,  pp.  436,  437.  "  F.  R.,  p.  542. 

"^F.  R..  p.  477.  "F.  R.,  p.  478. 


56  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

tence  of  legal  proceedings,  but  when  once  he  had  determined 
on  the  ruin  of  the  Company,  means  to  accomplish  his  end  were 
not  lacking.  John  Ferrar  wrote,  "The  King,  notwithstanding 
his  royal  word  and  honor  pledged  to  the  contrary  .  .  .  was 
now  determined  with  all  his  force  to  make  the  last  assault,  and 
give  the  death  blow  to  this  .  .  .  Company."^^ 

James  began  by  hunting  evidence  of  mismanagement  and 
incapacity  by  the  Sandys  party.  He  gave  orders  to  Captain 
Nathaniel  Butler,  who  had  spent  some  months  in  Virginia,  to 
write  a  pamphlet  describing  the  condition  of  the  colony.  The 
Unmasking  of  Virginia,  as  Butler's  work  is  called  was  nothing 
less  than  a  bitter  assault  upon  the  conduct  of  affairs  since  the 
beginning  of  the  Sandys  administration.  Unfortunately,  it 
was  not  necessary  for  the  author  to  exaggerate  much  in  his 
description  of  the  frightful  conditions  in  the  colony;  but  it 
was  unfair  to  place  the  blame  upon  the  Company.  The  mis- 
fortunes of  the  settlers  were  due  to  disease  and  the  Indians 
and  did  not  result  from  incapacity  or  negligence  on  the  part 
of  Sandys.  The  Company  drew  up  "A  True  answer  to  a  writ- 
ing of  Information  presented  to  his  Majesty  by  Captain  Na- 
thaniel Butler",  denying  most  of  the  charges  and  explaining 
others,  but  they  could  not  efface  the  bad  impression  caused  by 
the  Unmasking.^^ 

In  April,  1623,  James  appointed  a  commission  to  make  en- 
quiry into  the  "true  estate  of  .  .  .  Virginia". ®°  This  body 
was  directed  to  investigate  "all  abuses  and  grievances  ...  all 
wrongs  and  injuryes  done  to  any  adventurers  or  planters  and 
the  grounds  and  causes  thereof,  and  to  propound  after  what 
sort  the  same  may  be  better  managed".®^  It  seems  quite  clear 
that  the  commissioners  understood  that  they  were  expected 
to  give  the  King  "some  true  ground  to  work  upon",  in  his 
attack  on  the  Company's  charter.®^  In  a  few  weeks  they  were 
busy  receiving  testimony  from  both  sides,  examining  records 
and  searching  for  evidence.  They  commanded  the  Company 
to  deliver  to  them  all  "Charters,   Books,  Letters,  Petitions, 

•*F.R.,  pp.  531,  532.  "PR.,  p,  524. 

••  F.  R.,  p.  520.  "  F.  R.,  p.  520. 

-F.  R.,  p.  521. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  57 

Lists  of  names,  of  Provisions,  Invoyces  of  Goods,  and  all 
other  writing  whatsoever".  They  examined  the  clerk  of  the 
Company,  the  messenger  and  the  keeper  of  the  house  in  which 
they  held  their  meetings.®^  They  intercepted  private  letters 
from  Virginia,  telling  of  the  horrible  suffering  there,  and  made 
the  King  aware  of  their  contents.^* 

In  July  the  commission  made  its  report.  It  found  that 
"the  people  sent  to  inhabit  there  .  .  .  were  most  of  them  by 
God's  visitation,  sicknes  of  body,  famine,  and  by  mas- 
sacres .  ,  .  dead  and  deceased,  and  those  that  were  living 
of  them  lived  in  miserable  and  lamentable  necessity  and 
want.  .  .  .  That  this  neglect  they  conceived,  must  fall  on  the 
Governors  and  Company  here,  who  had  power  to  direct  the 
Plantations  there.  .  .  .  That  if  his  Majesty's  first  Grant  of 
April  lo  1606,  and  his  Majesty's  most  prudent  and  princely 
Instructions  given  in  the  beginning  .  .  .  had  been  pursued, 
much  better  effects  had  been  produced,  than  had  been  by  the 
alteration  thereof,  into  so  popular  a  course."^^  James  was 
much  pleased  with  the  report,  and  it  confirmed  his  determina- 
tion to  "resume  the  government,  and  to  reduce  that  popular 
form  so  as  to  make  it  agree  with  the  monarchial  form".®^ 

Before  taking  the  matter  to  the  courts,  the  King  resolved 
to  offer  the  Company  a  compromise.  If  they  would  give  up 
the  old  charter,  he  said,  a  new  one  would  be  granted  them, 
preserving  all  private  interests,  but  restoring  the  active  control 
of  the  colony  to  the  Crown.  The  government  was  to  be 
modelled  upon  the  old  plan  of  1606,  which  had  already  given 
so  much  trouble.  "His  Majesty,"  the  Company  was  told, 
"hath  .  .  .  resolved  by  a  new  Charter  to  appoint  a  Governor 
and  twelve  assistants,  resident  here  in  England,  unto  whom 
shall  be  committed  the  government.  .  .  .  And  his  Majesty 
is  pleased  that  there  shall  be  resident  in  Virginia  a  Governor 
and  twelve  assistants,  to  be  nominated  by  the  Governor  and 
assistants  here  .  .  .  whereby  all  matters  of  importance  may  be 
directed  by  his  Majesty."^'^     The  Company  was  commanded 

«F.  R..  p.  541.  "^F.  R.,  p.  535. 

•*  F.  R.,  pp.  519,  520.  -F.  R.,  p.  542. 

«F.  R.,  p.  SSI. 


58  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

to  send  its  reply  immediately,  "his  Majesty  being  determined, 
in  default  of  such  submission,  to  proceed  for  the  recalling  of' 
the  said  former  charters". ^^ 

A  special  meeting  of  the  stockholders  was  called,  October 
30th,  1623,  to  consider  the  King's  proposal.  Every  man 
present  must  have  known  that  the  rejection  of  the  compromise 
would  mean  the  loss  of  all  the  money  he  had  invested  in  the 
colony,  and  that  if  the  King's  wishes  were  acceded  to  his 
interests  would  be  preserved.  But  the  Company  was  fighting 
for  something  higher  than  personal  gain — for  the  maintenance 
of  liberal  institutions  in  America,  for  the  defence  of  the  rights 
of  English  citizens.  After  a  "hot  debate"  they  put  the  ques- 
tion to  the  vote,  and  the  offer  was  rejected,  there  being  "only 
nine  hands  for  the  delivering  up  of  the  Charters,  and  all  the 
rest  (being  about  three  score  more)  were  of  a  contrary 
opinion", ^^ 

As  a  last  hope  the  Company  resolved  to  seek  the  assistance 
of  Parliament.  A  petition  was  drawn  up  to  be  presented  to 
the  Commons,  and  the  shareholders  that  were  members  of  that 
body  were  requested  to  give  it  their  strenuous  support  when 
it  came  up  for  consideration.  The  petition  referred  to  Vir- 
ginia as  a  "child  of  the  Kingdom,  exposed  as  in  the  wilderness 
to  extreme  danger  and  as  it  were  fainting  and  labouring  for 
life",  and  it  prayed  the  House  to  hear  "the  grievances  of  the 
Colony  and  Company,  and  grant  them  redress". ^°^  The  matter 
was  brought  before  the  Commons  in  May,  1624,  but  before  it 
could  be  considered,  a  message  was  received  from  the  King 
warning  them  "not  to  trouble  themselves  with  this  petition  as 
their  doing  so  could  produce  nothing  but  a  further  increase 
Schisme  and  factions  in  the  Company".  "Ourself,"  he  an- 
nounced, "will  make  it  our  own  work  to  settle  the  quiet,  and 
wellfare  of  the  plantations. "^*^^  This  was  received  with  some 
"soft  mutterings"  by  the  Commons,  but  they  thought  it  best 
to  comply,  and  the  Company  was  left  to  its  fate.^^^ 

In  the  meanwhile  the  King  had  placed  his  case  in  the  hands 

•'F.  R..  p.  542.  ~F.  R..  p.  554. 

"•F.  R.,  pp.  595,  596.  "'F.  R.,  pp.  597,  598. 

"»F.  R.,  p.  598. 


REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  59 

of  Attorney-General  Coventry,  who  had  prepared  a  quo 
warranto  against  the  Company. ^^^  Although  all  hope  of  re- 
taining the  charter  was  gone,  the  Sandys  party  were  deter- 
mined to  fight  to  the  end.  They  voted  to  employ  attorneys 
and  to  plead  their  case  before  the  King's  Bench.  The  quo 
warranto  came  up  June  26th,  1624,  and  "the  Virginia  Patent 
was  overthrown",  on  a  mistake  in  pleading.^®*  With  this 
judgment  the  London  Company  practically  ceased  to  exist,  and 
Virginia  became  a  royal  province. 

"'  F.  R.,  p.  587.  "^  F.  R..  pp.  601,  602. 


CHAPTER  III 
The  Expulsion  of  Sir  John  Harvey 

The  people  of  Virginia  sympathized  deeply  with  the  London 
Company  in  its  efforts  to  prevent  the  revocation  of  the  char- 
ter. The  Governor,  the  Council  and  the  Burgesses  gave 
active  assistance  to  Sandys  and  his  friends  by  testifying  to 
the  wisdom  of  the  management  and  contradicting  the  calum- 
nies of  their  enemies.  In  the  midst  of  the  controversy  the 
Privy  Council  had  appointed  a  commission  which  they  sent  to 
Virginia  to  investigate  conditions  there  and  to  gather  evidence 
against  the  Company.  This  board  consisted  of  John  Harvey, 
John  Pory,  Abraham  Piersey  and  Samuel  Matthews,  men 
destined  to  play  prominent  roles  in  Virginia  history,  but  then 
described  as  "certayne  obscure  persons".^  When  the  commis- 
sioners reached  the  colony  they  made  known  to  the  Assembly 
the  King's  desire  to  revoke  the  charter  and  to  take  upon  him- 
self the  direction  of  the  government.  They  then  asked  the 
members  to  subscribe  to  a  statement  expressing  their  gratitude 
for  the  care  of  the  King,  and  willingness  to  consent  to  the 
contemplated  change.  The  Assembly  returned  the  paper  un- 
signed. "When  our  consent,"  they  said,  "to  the  surrender 
of  the  Pattents,  shalbe  required,  will  be  the  most  proper  time 
to  make  reply:  in  the  mean  time  wee  conceive  his  Majesties 
intention  of  changing  the  government  hath  proceeded  from 
much  misinformation."^ 

After  this  they  ignored  the  commissioners,  and  addressed 
themselves  in  direct  letters  and  petitions  to  the  King  and  the 
Privy  Council.^  They  apprehended,  they  wrote,  no  danger 
from  the  present  government,  which  had  converted  into  free- 
dom the  slavery  they  had  endured  in  former  times.*  They 
prayed  that  their  liberal  institutions  might  not  be  destroyed 

»F.  R.,  p.  556;  Osg.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  47. 'F.  R.,  p.  574. 
»F.  R.,  p.  572.  *  Osg.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  so. 

60 


-i 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  6i 

or  the  old  Smith  faction  of  the  Company  placed  over  them 
again.^  These  papers  they  sent  to  England  by  one  of  their 
number,  John  Pountis,  even  refusing  to  let  the  commissioners 
see  them.  But  Pory  succeeded  in  securing  copies  from  the 
acting  secretary,  Edward  Sharpless.^  The  Council,  upon 
learning  of  this  betrayal,  were  so  incensed  against  the  secre- 
tary that  they  sentenced  him  to  "stand  in  the  Pillory  and  there 
to  have  his  Ears  nailed  to  it,  and  cut  qff".''^  His  punishment 
was  modified,  however,  so  that  when  he  was  "sett  in  the  Pil- 
lorie",  he  "lost  but  a  part  of  one  of  his  eares".®  The  King, 
upon  learning  of  this  incident,  which  was  represented  to  him 
"as  a  bloody  and  barbarous  act",  became  highly  incensed 
against  the  Council.® 

In  the  meanwhile  James  had  appointed  a  large  commission, 
with  Viscount  Mandeville  at  its  head,  "to  confer,  consult, 
resolve  and  expedite  all  affaires  ...  of  Virginia,  and  to  take 
care  and  give  order  for  the  directing  and  government  there- 
^£'»  10  This  body  met  weekly  at  the  house  of  Sir  Thomas 
Smith,  and  immediately  assumed  control  of  the  colony.  ^^  Their 
first  act  was  to  decide  upon  a  form  of  government  to  replace 
the  Virginia  Magna  Charta.  In  conformance  with  the  wishes 
of  the  King  they  resolved  to  return  to  the  plan  of  1606.  In 
their  recommendations  no  mention  was  made  of  an  Assembly. 
It  seemed  for  a  while  that  the  work  of  Sandys  was  to  be 
undone,  and  the  seeds  of  liberty  in  Virginia  destroyed  almost 
before  they  had  taken  root.  Fortunately,  however,  this  was 
not  to  be.  The  commission,  perhaps  wishing  to  allay  the  fears 
of  the  colonists,  reappointed  Sir  Francis  Wyatt  Governor,  and 
retained  most  of  the  old  Council.  This  made  it  certain  that  for 
a  while  at  least  the  government  was  to  be  in  the  hands  of  men 
of  lofty  character  and  liberal  views. ^^  More  fortunate  still 
for  Virginia  was  the  death  of  James  I.  This  event  removed 
the  most  determined  enemy  of  their  Assembly,  and  placed 
upon  the  throne  a  man  less  hostile  to  the  Sandys  faction,  less 
determined  to  suppress  the  liberal  institutions  of  the  colony. 

•  Osg.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  50.  T.  R.,  p.  584. 

^F.  R.,  p.  584.  »P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-3. 

•F.  R.,  p.  584.  '  "F.  R.,  p.  634. 

"Osg.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  74.  "F.  R.,  p.  639  . 


62  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Soon  after  his  accession  Charles  I  aboHshed  the  Mandeville 
commission  and  appointed  in  its  place  a  committee  of  the  Privy 
Council. ^^  For  a  while  he  seemed  inclined  to  restore  the  Com- 
pany, for  he  consulted  with  Sandys  and  requested  him  to  give 
his  opinion  "touching  the  best  form  of  Government".^*  But 
he  finally  rejected  his  proposals,  declaring  that  he  had  come  to 
the  same  determination  that  his  father  had  held.  He  was  re- 
solved, he  said,  that  the  government  should  be  immediately 
dependent  upon  himself  and  not  be  committed  to  any  company 
or  corporation.^^  But,  like  his  father,  he  was  "pleased  to 
authorise  Sir  Francis  Wyatt  knight  to  be  governor  there,  and 
such  as  are  now  employed  for  his  Majesties  Councell  there  to 
have  authoritie  to  continue  the  same  employment".  No  pro- 
vision was  made  for  a  representative  body,  the  power  of  issu- 
ing decrees,  ordinances  and  public  orders  being  assigned  to  the 
Council. 

But  the  Assembly  was  saved  by  the  unselfish  conduct  of 
Wyatt  and  Yeardley  and  their  Councils. ^^  Had  these  men 
sought  their  own  gain  at  the  expense  of  the  liberty  of  their 
fellow  colonists,  they  would  have  welcomed  a  change  that 
relieved  them  from  the  restraint  of  the  representatives  of  the 
people.  The  elimination  of  the  Burgesses  would  have  left  them 
as  absolute  as  had  been  Wingfield  and  the  first  Council.  But 
they  were  most  anxious  to  preserve  for  Virginia  the  right 
of  representative  government,  and  wrote  to  England  again 
and  again  pleading  for  the  reestablishment  of  the  Assembly. ^'^ 
"Above  all,"  they  said,  "we  humbly  intreat  your  Lordships  that 
we  may  retaine  the  Libertie  of  our  Generall  Assemblie,  than 
which  nothing  can  more  conduce  to  our  satisfaction  or  the 
publique  utilitie."^®  In  1625  Yeardley  himself  crossed  the 
ocean  to  present  a  new  petition.  He  pleaded  with  Charles  "to 
avoid  the  oppression  of  Governors  there,  that  their  liberty  of 
Generall  Assemblyes  may  be  continued  and  confirmed,  and  that 
they  may  have  a  voice  in  the  election  of  officers,  as  in  other 
Corporations".^®    After  the  overthrow  of  the  Company  char- 

"  F.  R.,  p.  640.  "  F.  R.,  p.  641. 

"F.  R.,  pp.  641,  642.  "F.  R.,  p.  647. 

"F.  R.,  p.  648.  "F.  R.,  p.  573. 
"P.  R.  O,  COi-3-7. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  63 

ter,  there  could  be  no  legal  election  of  Burgesses  and  no  legisla- 
tion save  by  proclamation  of  the  Governor  and  Council.  Yet 
Wyatt,  in  order  to  preserve  as  far  as  possible  some  form  of 
representative  government,  held  conventions  or  informal 
meetings  of  leading  citizens,  to  confer  with  the  Council  on 
important  matters.  They  issued  papers  under  the  title  of 
"Governor,  Councell  and  Collony  of  Virginia  assembled  to- 
gether",^" and  it  is  possible  that  the  people  elected  their  dele- 
gates just  as  they  had  formerly  chosen  Burgesses.  Since, 
however,  acts  passed  by  these  assemblages  could  not  be  en- 
forced in  the  courts,  all  legislation  for  the  time  being  took  the 
form  of  proclamations.^^ 

Finally  Charles  yielded  to  the  wishes  of  the  people,  and,  in 
the  fall  of  1627,  sent  written  instructions  to  the  officials  in 
Virginia  to  hold  an  election  of  Burgesses  and  to  summon  a 
General  Assembly.^^  The  King's  immediate  motive  for  this 
important  step  was  his  desire  to  gain  the  planters'  acceptance 
through  their  representatives  of  an  offer  which  he  made  to 
buy  all  their  tobacco.  In  the  spring  of  1628  the  Council  wrote, 
"In  obedience  to  his  Majesties  Commands  wee  have  given 
order  that  all  the  Burgesses  of  Particular  Plantations  should 
shortly  be  assembled  at  James  Citty  that  by  the  general  and 
unanimous  voice  of  the  whole  Colony  his  Majesty  may  receave 
a  full  answere."^^  Although  the  Assembly  must  have  realized 
that  its  very  existence  might  depend  upon  its  compliance  with 
the  King's  wishes,  it  refused  to  accept  his  proposition.  The 
planters  were  willing  to  sell  their  tobacco  to  his  Majesty,  but 
only  upon  more  liberal  terms  than  those  offered  them.  Charles 
rejected  the  counter-proposals  of  the  Virginians,  with  some 
show  of  anger,  but  he  did  not  abolish  the  Assembly,  and  in 
ensuing  years  sessions  were  held  with  great  regularity.^^ 

The  apprehensions  of  the  colonists  during  this  trying  period 
were  made  more  acute  by  the  resignation  of  Sir  Francis 
Wyatt.  In  the  winter  of  1625-26  the  Council  wrote  the  Vir- 
ginia commissioners,   "The  Governor  hath  long  expected  a 

"P.   R.   O.,   COi-3-5.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  129,  130. 

^F.  R.,  p.  648;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-4.     ^P.  R.  O.,  COi-20. 
^  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  287. 


64  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Successor,  and  the  necessity  of  his  private  estate  compelling 
him  not  to  put  off  any  longer  his  return  for  England,  wee  hope 
it  is  already  provided  for."^^  Great  must  have  been  the  relief 
in  the  colony  when  it  was  learned  that  Sir  George  Yeardley 
had  been  chosen  to  succeed  Governor  Wyatt.  Yeardley  had 
been  the  bearer  of  the  Virginia  Magna  Charta,  under  which 
the  first  Assembly  had  been  established,  and  his  services  had 
not  been  forgotten  by  the  people.  But  he  was  not  destined 
to  see  the  restoration  of  the  Burgesses,  for  he  died  in  Novem- 
ber, 1627.2^  We  have  lost,  wrote  the  Council  in  great  grief, 
"a  main  pillar  of  this  our  building  &  thereby  a  support  to  the 
whole  body".^''' 

By  virtue  of  previous  appointment.  Captain  Francis  West, 
brother  of  the  Lord  De  la  Warr  who  had  lost  his  life  in  the 
service  of  Virginia,  at  once  assumed  the  reins  of  government. 
Captain  West  continued  in  office  until  March  5th,  1629,  when 
he  resigned  in  order  to  return  to  England.^®  John  Harvey,  a 
member  of  the  Virginia  commission  of  1624,  was  the  King's 
next  choice  for  Governor,  but  pending  his  arrival,  the  office 
fell  to  one  of  the  Council — Dr.  John  Pott.  This  man  had  long 
been  a  resident  of  Virginia,  and  had  acted  as  Physician- 
General  during  the  years  when  the  sickness  was  at  the  worst. 
He  is  described  as  "a  Master  of  Arts  .  .  .  well  practiced  in 
chirurgery  and  physic,  and  expert  also  in  the  distilling  of 
waters,  (besides)  many  other  ingenious  devices".^®  He  had 
made  use  of  these  accomplishments  to  poison  large  numbers  of 
Indians  after  the  massacre  of  1622.^*^  This  exploit  caused 
the  temporary  loss  of  his  place  in  the  Council,  for  when 
James  I  settled  the  government  after  the  fall  of  the  Company, 
Pott  was  left  out  at  the  request  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick,  be- 
cause "he  was  the  poysoner  of  the  salvages  thear".^^  In  1626 
his  seat  was  restored  to  him.  He  seems  to  have  been  both 
democratic  and  convival,  and  is  described  as  fond  of  the  com- 
pany of  his  inferiors,  "who  hung  upon  him  while  his  good 
liquor  lasted".^^ 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-4.  "  F.  R.,  p.  647. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-4-18.  ^  Gen.,  p.  1047. 

*Neill,  Va.  Co.,  p.  221.  ^  F.  R.,  p.  568. 

*  F.  R.,  p.  639.  ''  Fiske,  Old  Va.,  Vol.  I,  p.  252. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  65 

In  the  spring  of  1630  Sir  John  Harvey  arrived  in  Vir- 
ginia.^^  This  man  proved  to  be  one  of  the  worst  of  the  many 
bad  colonial  governors.  Concerned  only  for  his  own  dignity 
and  for  the  prerogative  of  the  King,  he  trampled  without 
scruple  upon  the  liberties  of  the  people,  and  his  administration 
was  marked  throughout  by  injustice  and  oppression. 

His  first  efforts  as  Governor  were  to  attempt  to  win  the 
friendship  and  support  of  one  of  the  Council  and  to  bring 
humiliation  and  ruin  upon  another.  He  had  been  in  Virginia 
but  a  few  weeks  when  he  wrote  the  King  asking  especial  favors 
for  Captain  Samuel  Matthews.  "This  gentleman,"  he  said, 
*T  found  most  readie  to  set  forward  all  services  propounded 
for  his  Majesties  honor,  .  .  .  and  without  his  faithful  assist- 
ance perhaps  I  should  not  soe  soon  have  brought  the  busines 
of  this  Country  to  so  good  effect."  It  would  be  a  just  reward 
for  these  services,  he  thought,  to  allow  him  for  a  year  or  two 
to  ship  the  tobacco  of  his  plantation  into  England  free  of 
customs.^^  At  the  same  time  Harvey  seemed  bent  upon  the 
utter  undoing  of  Dr.  Pott.  Claiming  that  the  pleasure  lov- 
ing physician  while  Governor  had  been  guilty  of  "pardoninge 
wilfull  Murther,  markinge  other  mens  Cattell  for  his  owne, 
and  killing  up  their  hoggs",  Harvey  suspended  him  from  the 
Council  and,  pending  the  day  of  his  trial,  confined  him  to  his 
plantation.^^ 

It  seems  quite  certain  that  this  treatment  of  the  two  Coun- 
cillors was  designed  to  impress  upon  the  people  a  just  appre- 
ciation of  the  Governor's  power.  Harvey  felt  keenly  the 
restriction  of  the  Council.  It  had  been  the  intention  of  James 
and  after  his  death  Charles  to  restore  the  government  of  the 
colony  to  its  original  form,  in  which  all  matters  were  deter- 
mined by  the  Council.  "His  Majesties  .  .  .  pleasure,"  wrote 
the  Privy  Council  in  1625,  "is  that  all  judgements,  decrees, 
and  all  important  actions  be  given,  determined  and  undertaken 
by  the  advice  and  voices  of  the  greater  part."^^  If  these  in- 
structions were  adhered  to,  the  Governor  would  become  no 
more  than  the  presiding  officer  of  the  Council.     To  this  posi- 

**  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  130.  ^  P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-5-29. 

""  P.  R.  O.,  COi-s.  ^F.  R.,  p.  644. 


66  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

tion  Harvey  was  determined  never  to  be  reduced.  He  would, 
at  the  very  outset,  show  that  he  was  master  in  Virginia,  able  to 
reward  his  friends,  or  to  punish  those  that  incurred  his 
displeasure. 

Dr.  Pott  could  not  believe  that  the  proceedings  against  him 
were  intended  seriously,  and,  in  defiance  of  the  Governor's 
commands,  left  his  plantation  to  come  to  Elizabeth  City. 
"Upon  which  contempt,"  wrote  Harvey,  "I  committed  him 
close  prisoner,  attended  with  a  guard."  At  the  earnest  re- 
quest of  several  gentlemen,  the  Governor  finally  consented  that 
he  might  return  to  his  plantation,  but  only  under  bond.  Pott, 
however,  refused  to  avail  himself  of  the  kindness  of  his  friends, 
and  so  was  kept  in  confinement.^''^  On  the  9th  of  July  he  was 
brought  to  trial,  found  guilty  upon  two  indictments,  and  his 
entire  estate  confiscated.^^ 

That  Pott  was  convicted  by  a  jury  of  thirteen  men,  three  of 
them  Councillors,  is  by  no  means  conclusive  evidence  of  his 
guilt.  The  close  connection  between  the  executive  and  the 
courts  at  this  time  made  it  quite  possible  for  the  Governor  to 
obtain  from  a  jury  whatever  verdict  he  desired.  In  fact  it 
became  the  custom  for  a  new  administration,  as  soon  as  it  was 
installed  in  power,  to  take  revenge  upon  its  enemies  by  means 
of  the  courts. 

Pott's  guilt  is  made  still  more  doubtful  by  the  fact  that 
execution  of  the  sentence  was  suspended  "untill  his  Majesties 
pleasure  might  be  signified  concerning  him",  while  the  Council 
united  in  giving  their  security  for  his  safe  keeping.^^  Harvey 
himself  wrote  asking  the  King's  clemency.  "For  as  much," 
he  said,  "as  he  is  the  only  Physician  in  the  Colonic,  and  skilled 
in  the  Epidemicall  diseases  of  the  planters,  ...  I  am  bound  to 
entreat"  your  Majesty  to  pardon  him.**^  It  would  seem  quite 
inexplicable  that  Harvey  should  go  to  so  much  trouble  to  con- 
vict Dr.  Pott,  and  then  write  immediately  to  England  for  a 
pardon,  did  not  he  himself  give  the  clue  to  his  conduct.     "It 

''P.  R.  O.,  CO1-5-31. 

»*P.  R.  O.,  COi-s-32;  Hen.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  145. 
"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-s ;  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  146. 
**  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-5. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  67 


will  be,"  he  said,  "a  means  to  bring  the  people  to  .  .  .  hold  a 
better  respect  to  the  Governor  than  hitherto  they  have  done."^^ 
Having  shown  the  colonists  that  he  could  humble  the  strong- 
est of  them,  he  now  sought  to  teach  them  that  his  intercession 
with  the  King  could  restore  even  the  criminal  to  his  former 
position. 

When  Dr.  Pott  was  at  Elizabeth  City  his  wife  was  reported 
to  be  ill,  but  this  did  not  deter  her  from  making  the  long  and 
dangerous  voyage  to  England  to  appeal  to  the  King  "touching 
the  wrong"  done  her  husband. ^^  Charles  referred  the  matter 
to  the  Virginia  commissioners,  who  gave  her  a  hearing  in  the 
presence  of  Harvey's  agent.  Finding  no  justification  for  the 
proceedings  against  him,  they  wrote  Harvey  that  for  aught 
they  could  tell  Pott  had  demeaned  himself  well  and  that  there 
seemed  to  have  been  "some  hard  usage  against  him".^^  The 
sentence  of  confiscation  seems  never  to  have  been  carried  out, 
but  Pott  was  not  restored  to  his  seat  in  the  Council.^^ 

This  arbitrary  conduct  did  not  succeed  in  intimidating  the 
other  Councillors.  These  men  must  have  felt  that  the  attack 
upon  Dr.  Pott  was  aimed  partly  at  the  dignity  and  power  of 
the  Council  itself.  If  Harvey  could  thus  ruin  those  that  in- 
curred his  displeasure,  the  Councillors  would  lose  all  inde- 
pendence in  their  relations  with  him.  Soon  they  were  in  open 
hostility  to  the  Governor.  Clairning  that  Harvey  could  do 
nothing  without  their  consent,  and  that  all  important  matters 
had  to  be  determined  "by  the  greater  number  of  voyces  at  the 
Councell  Table",  they  entered  upon  a  policy  of  obstruction.  It 
was  in  vain  that  the  Governor  declared  that  he  was  the  King's 
substitute,  that  they  were  but  his  assistants,  and  that  they  were 
impeding  his  Majesty's  business ;  they  would  yield  to  him  only 
the  position  of  first  among  equals.  Early  in  1631  Harvey  was 
filling  his  letters  to  England  with  complaints  of  the  "wayward- 
ness and  oppositions  of  those  of  the  Councell".  "For  instead 
of  giving  me  assistance,"  he  declared,  "they  stand  Contesting 
and  disputing  my  authoritie,  avering  that  I  can  doe  nothinge 
but  what  they  shall  advise  me,  and  that  my  power  extendeth 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-5-32.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-5-33. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-5-33.  **  P.  R-  O.,  COi-6. 


68  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

noe  further  than  a  bare  casting  voice."^^  He  had  received,  he 
claimed,  a  letter  from  the  King,  strengthening  his  commissic^i 
and  empowering  him  to  "doe  justice  to  all  men,  not  sparinge 
those  of  the  Councell",  which  he  had  often  shown  them,  but  this 
they  would  not  heed.  "I  hope,"  he  wrote,  "you  never  held  me 
to  be  ambitious  or  vainglorious,  as  that  I  should  desire  to  live 
here  as  Governor  to  predominate,  or  prefer  mine  owne  particu- 
lar before  the  generall  good."  My  position  in  Virginia  is 
most  miserable,  "chiefly  through  the  aversions  of  those  from 
whom  I  expected  assistance".  He  had  often  tried  to  bring 
peace  and  amity  between  them,  but  all  to  no  purpose,  for  he  was 
scorned  for  his  efforts.  He  would  be  humbly  thankful  if  his 
Majesty  would  be  pleased  to  strengthen  his  commission,  "that 
the  place  of  Governor  and  the  duty  of  Councellors  may  be 
knowne  and  distinguished".^® 

It  is  probable  that  the  Councillors  also  wrote  to  England,  to 
place  before  the  King  their  grievances  against  Harvey,  for 
before  the  end  of  the  year  letters  came  from  the  Privy  Council, 
warning  both  sides  to  end  the  dispute  and  to  proceed  peacefully 
with  the  government  of  the  colony.  In  compliance  with  these 
commands  they  drew  up  and  signed  a  document  promising  "to 
swallow  up  &  bury  all  forepart  Complainte  and  accusations  in 
a  generall  Reconciliation".  They  thanked  their  Lordships  for 
advice  that  had  persuaded  their  "alienated  &  distempered" 
minds  to  thoughts  of  love  and  peace  and  to  the  execution  of 
public  justice.  The  Council  promised  to  give  the  Governor 
"all  the  service,  honor  &  due  Respect  which  belongs  unto  him 
as  his  Majesties  Substitute".^'''  It  is  quite  evident,  however, 
that  this  reconciliation,  inspired  by  fear  of  the  anger  of  the 
Privy  Council,  could  not  be  permanent.  Soon  the  Council, 
under  the  leadership  of  Captain  Matthews,  who  had  long  since 
forfeited  Harvey's  favor,  was  as  refractory  as  ever. 

A  new  cause  for  complaint  against  the  Governor  arose  with 
the  founding  of  Maryland.  In  1623  George  Calvert,  the  first 
Lord  Baltimore,  had  received  a  grant  of  the  great  south- 
eastern promontory  in  Newfoundland,  and  had  planted  there  a 

«  P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-34.  *•  P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-35,  57. 

*'  P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-37. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  69 

colony  as  an  asylum  for  English  Catholics.  Baltimore  himself 
had  been  detained  in  England  for  some  years,  but  in  1627 
came  with  his  wife  and  children  to  take  personal  control  of 
his  little  settlement.  His  experience  with  the  severe  New- 
foundland winter  persuaded  him  that  it  would  be  wise  to  trans- 
fer his  colony  to  a  more  congenial  clime.  "From  the  middle 
of  October,"  he  wrote  Charles  I,  "to  the  middle  of  May  there 
is  a  sad  face  of  winter  upon  all  the  land ;  both  sea  and  land  so 
frozen  for  the  greater  part  of  the  time  as  they  are  not  pene- 
trable .  .  .  besides  the  air  so  intolerable  cold  as  it  is  hardly 
to  be  endured.  ...  I  am  determined  to  commit  this  place  to 
fishermen  that  are  able  to  encounter  stormes  and  hard  weather, 
and  to  remove  myself  with  some  forty  persons  to  your  Majes- 
ties dominion  of  Virginia ;  where,  if  your  Majesty  will  please  to 
grant  me  a  precinct  of  land,  with  such  privileges  as  the  King 
your  father  .  .  .  was  pleased  to  grant  me  here,  I  shall  en- 
deavour to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  to  deserve  it."^® 

In  1629  he  sailed  for  Virginia,  with  his  wife  and  children, 
and  arrived  at  Jamestown  the  first  day  of  October.  His  recep- 
tion by  Governor  Pott  and  the  Council  was  by  no  means  cordial. 
The  Virginians  were  loath  either  to  receive  a  band  of  Catholics 
into  their  midst,  or  to  concede  to  them  a  portion  of  the  land 
that  they  held  under  the  royal  charters.  Desiring  to  be  rid  of 
Baltimore  as  speedily  as  possible,  they  tendered  him  the  oath  of 
supremacy.  This,  of  course,  as  a  good  Catholic  he  could  not 
take,  for  it  recognized  the  English  sovereign  as  the  supreme 
authority  in  all  ecclesiastical  matters.  Baltimore  proposed  an 
alternative  oath  of  allegiance,  but  the  Governor  and  Council 
refused  to  accept  it,  and  requested  him  to  leave  at  once.  Know- 
ing that  it  was  his  intention  to  apply  for  a  tract  of  land  within 
their  borders,  the  Virginians  sent  William  Claiborne  after  him 
to  London,  to  watch  him  and  to  thwart  his  designs. 

Despite  Claiborne's  efforts  a  patent  was  granted  Baltimore, 
making  him  lord  proprietor  of  a  province  north  of  the  Potomac 
river,  which  received  the  name  of  Maryland.  Baltimore,  with 
his  own  hand,  drew  up  the  charter,  but  in  April,  1632,  before 
it  had  passed  under  the  Great  Seal,  he  died.     A  few  weeks 

*»Fiske.  Old  Va.,  Vol.  I.  pp.  262,  263. 


70  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

later  the  patent  was  issued  to  his  eldest  son,  Cecilius  Calvert. 
The  Virginians  protested  against  this  grant  "within  the  Limits 
of  the  Colony",  claiming  that  it  would  interfere  with  their 
Indian  trade  in  the  Chesapeake,  and  that  the  establishment  of 
the  Catholics  so  near  their  settlements  would  "give  a  generall 
disheartening  of  the  Planters". ^^  But  their  complaints  availed 
nothing.  Not  only  did  Charles  refuse  to  revoke  the  charter,  but 
he  wrote  the  Governor  and  Council  commanding  them  to  give 
Lord  Baltimore  every  possible  assistance  in  making  his  settle- 
ment. You  must,  he  said,  "suffer  his  servants  and  Planters 
to  buy  and  transport  such  cattle  and  comodities  to  their  Colonic, 
as  you  may  conveniently  spare  .  .  .  and  give  them  .  .  .  such 
lawful  assistance  as  may  conduce  to  both  your  safetyes".^^ 

The  second  Lord  Baltimore  appointed  his  brother,  Leonard 
Calvert,  Governor  of  Maryland,  and  sent  him  with  two  vessels 
and  over  three  hundred  men  to  plant  the  new  colony.  In  Feb- 
ruary, 1634,  the  expedition  reached  Point  Comfort,  where  it 
stopped  to  secure  from  the  Virginians  the  assistance  that  the 
King  had  promised  should  be  given  them. 

They  met  with  scant  courtesy.  The  planters  thought  it  a 
hard  matter  that  they  should  be  ordered  to  aid  in  the  establish- 
ment of  this  new  colony.  They  resented  the  encroachment 
upon  their  territories,  they  hated  the  newcomers  because  most 
of  them  were  Catholics,  they  feared  the  loss  of  a  part  of  their 
Indian  trade,  and  they  foresaw  the  growth  of  a  dangerous 
rival  in  the  culture  of  tobacco.  Despite  the  King's  letter  they 
refused  to  help  Calvert  and  his  men.  "Many  are  so  averse," 
wrote  Harvey,  "that  they  crye  and  make  it  their  familiar  talke 
that  they  would  rather  knock  their  Cattell  on  the  heades  than 
sell  them  to  Maryland.  "^^  The  Governor,  however,  not  daring 
to  disobey  his  sovereign's  commands,  gave  the  visitors  all  the 
assistance  in  his  power.  "For  their  present  accomodation," 
he  said,  "I  sent  unto  them  some  Cowes  of  myne  owne,  and  will 
do  my  best  to  procure  more,  or  any  thinge  else  they  stand  in 
need  of."^^    This  action  secured  for  Harvey  the  praise  of  the 

*•  P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-39.  "*  P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-39. 

•^P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-46.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-46. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  71 

Privy  Council,  but  it  made  him  more  unpopular  with  his 
Council  and  the  people  of  Virginia. 

After  a  stay  of  several  weeks  at  Point  Comfort,  Calvert 
sailed  up  the  Chesapeake  into  the  Potomac,  and  founded  the 
town  of  Saint  Mary's.  This,  however,  was  not  the  first  settle- 
ment in  Maryland.  In  1631,  William  Claiborne,  returning 
from  England  after  his  unsuccessful  attempt  to  block  the  issu- 
ing of  Baltimore's  charter,  had  established  a  settlement  upon 
Kent  Island  in  the  Chesapeake  Bay.  Here  he  had  built  dwell- 
ings and  mills  and  store  houses,  and  had  laid  out  orchards  and 
gardens.  In  thus  founding  a  colony  within  Baltimore's  terri- 
tory he  was  sustained  by  the  Council.  When  Calvert  arrived 
in  1634  he  sent  word  to  Claiborne  that  he  would  not  molest  his 
settlement,  but  since  Kent  Island  was  a  part  of  Maryland,  he 
must  hold  it  as  a  tenant  of  Lord  Baltimore.  Upon  receipt  of 
this  message  Claiborne  laid  the  matter  before  his  colleagues  of 
the  Virginia  Council,  and  asked  their  commands.  The  answer 
of  the  Councillors  shows  that  they  considered  the  new  patent 
an  infringement  upon  their  prior  rights  and  therefore  of  no 
effect.  They  could  see  no  reason,  they  told  Claiborne,  why 
they  should  render  up  the  Isle  of  Kent  any  more  than  the  other 
lands  held  under  their  patents.  As  it  was  their  duty  to  main- 
tain the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  colony,  his  settlement  must 
continue  under  the  government  and  laws  of  Virginia. 

Despite  the  defiant  attitude  of  the  Virginians,  it  is  probable 
that  Calvert  would  have  permitted  the  Kent  Islanders  to  remain 
unmolested,  had  not  a  report  spread  abroad  that  Claiborne  was 
endeavoring  to  persuade  the  Indians  to  attack  Saint  Mary's. 
A  joint  commission  of  Virginians  and  Marylanders  declared 
the  charge  false,  but  suspicion  and  ill  will  had  been  aroused,  and 
a  conflict  could  not  be  avoided.  In  April,  1635,  Governor  Cal- 
vert, alleging  that  Claiborne  was  indulging  in  illicit  trade,  fell 
upon  and  captured  one  of  his  merchantmen.  In  great  indigna- 
tion the  islanders  fitted  out  a  vessel,  the  Cockatrice,  to  scour  the 
Chesapeake  and  make  reprisals.  She  was  attacked,  however, 
by  two  pinnaces  from  Saint  Mary's  and,  after  a  severe  conflict 
in  which  several  men  were  killed,  was  forced  to  surrender.  A 
few  weeks  later  Claiborne  gained  revenge  by  defeating  the 
Marylanders  in  a  fight  at  the  mouth  of  the  Potomac. 


72  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

In  these  encounters  the  Kent  Islanders  had  the  sympathy  of 
the  Virginia  planters.  Excitement  ran  high  in  the  colony,  and 
there  was  danger  that  an  expedition  might  be  sent  to  Saint 
Mary's  to  overpower  the  intruders  and  banish  them  from  the 
country.  Resentment  against  Harvey,  who  still  gave  aid  and 
encouragement  to  Maryland,  became  more  bitter  than  ever. 
His  espousal  of  the  cause  of  the  enemies  of  Virginia  made  the 
planters  regard  him  as  a  traitor.  In  1635  Samuel  Matthews 
wrote  to  Sir  John  Wolstenholme,  "The  Inhabitants  also  under- 
stood with  indignation  that  the  Marylanders  had  taken  Capt. 
Claibournes  Pinnaces  and  men  .  .  ,  which  action  of  theirs  Sir 
John  Harvey  upheld  contrary  to  his  Majesties  express  com- 
mands."^^  The  Councillors  held  many  "meetings  and  consul- 
tations" to  devise  plans  for  the  overthrow  of  the  new  colony, 
and  an  active  correspondence  was  carried  on  with  Baltimore's 
enemies  in  England  in  the  vain  hope  that  the  charter  might 
yet  be  revoked.^* 

Matters  were  now  moving  rapidly  to  a  crisis.  Harvey's 
administration  became  more  and  more  unpopular.  Sir  John 
Wolstenholme,  who  kept  in  close  touch  with  the  colony,  de- 
clared that  the  Governor's  misconduct  in  his  government  was 
notorious  at  Court  and  in  the  city  of  London.^^  When,  in  the 
spring  of  1635,  ^e  was  rudely  thrust  out  of  his  office,  the  com- 
plaints against  him  were  so  numerous  that  it  became  necessary 
to  convene  the  Assembly  to  consider  them.^^ 

To  what  extent  Harvey  usurped  the  powers  of  the  General 
Assembly  is  not  clear,  but  it  seems  very  probable  that  he  fre- 
quently made  use  of  proclamations  to  enforce  his  will  upon 
the  people.^'''  It  was  quite  proper  and  necessary  for  the  Gov- 
ernor, when  the  houses  were  not  in  session,  to  issue  ordinances 
of  a  temporary  character,  but  this  was  a  power  susceptible  of 
great  abuse.  And  for  the  Governor  to  repeal  statutes  by  procla- 
mation would  be  fatal  to  the  liberties  of  the  people.  That 
Harvey  was  guilty  of  this  usurpation  seems  probable  from  the 
fact  that  a  law  was  enacted  declaring  it  the  duty  of  the  people 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-52.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-6-46. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-8-€o.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  223. 

"  Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Vol.  II,  p.  324. 


■«- 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  n 

to  disregard  all  proclamations  that  conflicted  with  any  act  of 
Assembly.^  ^ 

Also  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  Harvey  found  ways  of 
imposing  illegal  taxes  upon  the  people.  John  Burk,  in  his  His- 
tory of  Virginia,  declares  unreservedly  that  it  was  Harvey's 
purpose  "to  feed  his  avarice  and  rapacity,  by  assessing,  levy- 
ing, and  holding  the  public  revenue,  without  check  or 
responsibility".^^ 

In  1634  an  event  occurred  which  aroused  the  anger  of  the 
people,  widened  the  breach  between  the  Governor  and  the  Coun- 
cil, and  made  it  evident  to  all  that  Harvey  would  not  hesitate 
upon  occasion  to  disregard  property  rights  and  to  break  the 
laws  of  the  colony.  A  certain  Captain  Young  came  to  Virginia 
upon  a  commission  for  the  King.  Wishing  to  build  two  shal- 
lops while  in  the  colony  and  having  need  of  a  ship's  carpenter, 
Young,  with  the  consent  of  Harvey,  seized  a  skilled  servant 
of  one  of  the  planters.  This  arbitrary  procedure  was  in  direct 
defiance  of  a  statute  of  Assembly  of  March,  1624,  that  de- 
clared that  "the  Governor  shall  not  withdraw  the  inhabitants 
from  their  private  labors  to  any  service  of  his  own  upon  any 
colour  whatsoever".^*' 

Upon  hearing  of  the  incident  Captain  Samuel  Matthews  and 
other  members  of  the  Council  came  to  Harvey  to  demand  an 
explanation.  The  Governor  replied  that  the  man  had  been 
taken  because  Young  had  need  of  him  "to  prosecute  with  speed 
the  King's  service",  and  "that  his  Majesty  had  given  him 
authority  to  make  use  of  any  p^sons  he  found  there". ®^  This 
answer  did  not  satisfy  the  Councillors.  Matthews  declared 
"that  if  things  were  done  on  this  fashion  it  would  breed  ill 
bloude  in  Virginia",  and  in  anger  "turning  his  back,  with  his 
truncheon  lashed  off  the  heads  of  certain  high  weeds  that  were 
growing  there". ^^  Harvey,  wishing  to  appease  the  Councillors, 
said,  "Come  gentlemen,  let  us  goe  to  supper  &  for  the  night 
leave  this  discourse",  but  their  resentment  was  too  great  to 
"be  smoothed  over,  and  with  one  accord  rejecting  his  invitation, 

"  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  264.  "  Burk,  Vol.  II,  pp.  28,  29. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  124.         .  "  P.  R.  O.,  COi-8. 

'  P.  R.  O.,  COi-8. 


74  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

"they  departed  from  the  Governour  in  a  very  irreverent 
manner". ^^ 

Harvey,  in  his  letters  to  the  English  government  tried  to 
convey  the  impression  that  he  was  uniformly  patient  with  the 
Council,  and  courteous  in  all  the  disputes  that  were  constantly 
arising.  That  he  was  not  always  so  self  restrained  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  on  one  occasion,  he  became  embroiled  with  one 
of  the  Councillors,  Captain  Stevens,  and  knocked  out  some  of 
his  teeth  with  a  cudgel. ^^  Samuel  Matthews  wrote  that  he  had 
heard  the  Governor  "in  open  court  revile  all  the  Councell  and 
tell  them  they  were  to  give  their  attendance  as  assistants  only 
to  advise  with  him".  The  Governor  attempted,  he  declared,  to 
usurp  the  whole  power  of  the  courts,  without  regard  to  the 
rights  of  the  Councillors,  "whereby  justice  was  now  done  but 
soe  farr  as  suited  with  his  will,  to  the  great  losse  of  many 
mens  estates  and  a  generall  feare  in  all".®^ 

In  1634  the  King  once  more  made  a  proposal  to  the  colonists 
for  the  purchase  of  their  tobacco,  and  demanded  their  assent 
through  the  General  Assembly.  The  Burgesses,  who  dreaded 
all  contracts,  drew  up  an  answer  which  was  "in  effect  a  deniall 
of  his  Majesties  proposition",  and,  in  order  to  give  the  paper 
the  character  of  a  petition,  they  all  signed  it.  This  answer 
the  Governor  detained,  fearing,  he  said,  that  the  King  "would 
not  take  well  the  matter  thereof,  and  that  they  should  make  it 
a  popular  business,  by  subscribing  a  multitude  of  hands  thereto, 
as  thinking  thereby  to  give  it  countenance".^®  The  Governor's 
arbitrary  action  aroused  great  anger  throughout  the  colony. 
Matthews  wrote  Sir  John  Wolstenholme,  "The  Consideration 
of  the  wrong  done  by  the  Governor  to  the  whole  Colony  in 
detayning  the  foresaid  letters  to  his  Majesty  did  exceedingly 
perplex  them  whereby  they  were  made  sensible  of  the  condition 
of  the  present  Government."®^ 

The  crisis  had  now  come.  During  the  winter  of  1634-35 
the  Councillors  and  other  leading  citizens  were  holding  secret 
meetings  to  discuss  the  conduct  of  the  Governor.     Soon  Dr. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-8.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-8-63. 

*P.  R.  O.,  COi-8.  ••P.  R.  O.,  COi-8. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-8. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  75 

John  Pott,  whose  private  wrongs  made  him  a  leader  in  the 
popular  discontent,  was  going  from  plantation  to  plantation, 
denouncing  the  Governor's  conduct  and  inciting  the  people  to 
resistance.  Everywhere  the  angry  planters  gathered  around 
him,  and  willingly  subscribed  to  a  petition  for  a  redress  of 
grievances.  In  April,  1635,  Pott  was  holding  one  of  these 
meetings  in  York,  at  the  house  of  one  William  Warrens,  when 
several  friends  of  the  Governor  presented  themselves  for  ad- 
mission. "A  servant  meeting  them  told  them  they  must  not 
goe  in  .  .  .  whereupon  they  desisted  and  bended  themselves 
to  hearken  to  the  discourse  among  them."  In  the  confusion 
of  sounds  that  came  out  of  the  house  they  could  distinguish 
many  angry  speeches  against  Harvey  and  cries  against  his 
unjust  and  arbitrary  government.  When  Pott  read  his  peti- 
tion, and  told  the  assemblage  that  it  had  the  support  of  some  of 
the  Councillors,  they  all  rushed  forward  to  sign  their  names. 

When  Harvey  heard  of  these  proceedings  he  was  greatly 
enraged.  Summoning  the  Council  to  meet  without  delay,  he 
issued  warrants  for  Dr.  Pott  and  several  others  that  had  aided 
in  circulating  the  petition.  "After  a  few  days  Potts  was 
brought  up  prisoner,  having  before  his  apprehending  bin  in  the 
lower  parts  of  the  Country  there  also  mustering  his  names  at  a 
meeting  called  for  that  purpose."^*  He  does  not  seem  to  have 
feared  the  angry  threats  of  the  Governor,  for  when  put  in 
irons  and  brought  before  the  Council,  he  readily  consented  to 
surrender  the  offending  petition.  At  the  same  time  he  as- 
serted "that  if  he  had  offended  he  did  appeal  to  the  King,  for 
he  was  sure  of  noe  justice  from  Sir  John  Harvey".  When 
some  of  the  other  prisoners,  in  their  hearing  before  the  Coun- 
cil, asked  the  cause  of  their  arrest,  the  Governor  told  them  they 
should  be  informed  at  the  gallows. 

Shortly  after  this  the  Council  was  summoned  to  deliberate 
on  the  fate  of  the  accused.  The  Governor,  fearing  that  he 
might  not  secure  conviction  from  a  jury,  "declared  it  necessary 
that  Marshall  law  should  be  executed  upon"  them.  When  the 
Councillors  refused  to  consent  to  any  other  than  a  legal  trial, 
Harvey  flew  into  a  furious  passion.     For  a  while  he  paced 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-8-48. 


76  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

back  and  forth  in  the  room  hardly  able  to  contain  himself. 
At  length  he  sat  down  in  his  chair,  and  with  a  dark  countenance 
commanded  his  colleagues  to  be  seated,  A  long  pause  ensued, 
and  then  he  announced  that  he  had  a  question  that  they  must 
answer  each  in  his  turn,  without  deliberation  or  consultation. 
"What,"  he  enquired,  "doe  you  think  they  deserve  that  have 
gone  about  to  persuade  the  people  from  their  obedience  to 
his  Majesties  substitute?"  "And  I  begin  with  you,"  he  said, 
turning  to  Mr.  Minifie.  "I  am  but  a  young  lawyer,"  Minifie 
replied,  "and  dare  not  uppon  the  suddain  deliver  my  opinion." 
At  this  point  Mr.  Farrar  began  to  complain  of  these  strange 
proceedings,  but  Harvey  commanded  him  to  be  silent.  Captain 
Matthews  also  protested,  and  the  other  Councillors  soon 
joined  him  in  refusing  to  answer  the  Governor's  question. 
"Then  followed  many  bitter  Languages  from  him  till  the 
sitting  ended." 

At  the  next  meeting  Harvey  asked  what  the  Council  thought 
were  the  reasons  that  the  petition  had  been  circulated  against 
him,  and  demanded  to  know  whether  they  had  any  knowledge 
of  the  matter.  Mr.  Minifie  replied  that  the  chief  grievance 
of  the  people  was  the  detaining  of  the  letter  of  the  Assembly 
to  the  King.  This  answer  seems  to  have  aroused  the  Gov- 
ernor's fury,  for,  arising  from  his  seat,  and  striking  Mr. 
Minifie  a  resounding  blow  upon  the  shoulder,  he  cried,  "Doe 
you  say  soe?  I  arrest  you  upon  suspicion  of  treason  to  his 
Majesty."  But  Harvey  found  that  he  could  not  deal  thus 
arbitrarily  with  the  Councillors.  Utie  and  Matthews  rushed 
up  and  seizing  him  cried,  "And  we  you  upon  suspicion  of 
treason  to  his  Majestic".  Dr.  Pott,  who  was  present  and  had 
probably  been  waiting  for  this  crisis,  held  up  his  hand  as  a 
signal  to  confederates  without,  "when  straight  about  40  mus- 
ketiers  .  .  .  which  before  that  time  lay  hid,  came  .  .  .  run- 
ning with  their  peeces  presented"  towards  the  house.  "Stay 
here,"  commanded  Pott,  "until  there  be  use  of  you." 

In  the  meanwhile  the  Councillors  crowded  around  Harvey. 
"Sir,"  said  Matthews,  "there  is  no  harm  intended  you  save 
only  to  acquaint  you  with  the  grievances  of  the  Inhabitants 
and  to  that  end  I  desire  you  to  sit  downe  in  your  Chayre." 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  ^^ 

And  there,  with  the  enraged  Governor  seated  before  him,  he 
poured  out  the  recital  of  the  people's  wrongs.  When  he  had 
finished  there  came  an  ominous  pause.  Finally  Matthews  spoke 
again.  "Sir,"  he  said,  "the  peoples  fury  is  up  against  you  and 
to  appease  it,  is  beyond  our  power,  unlesse  you  please  to  goe 
for  England,  there  to  answer  their  complaints."  But  this 
Harvey  refused  to  do.  He  had  been  made  Governor  of 
Virginia  by  the  King,  he  said,  and  without  his  command  he 
would  not  leave  his  charge. 

But  before  many  days  the  Governor  changed  his  mind. 
He  found  himself  deserted  by  all  and  entirely  in  the  power  of 
the  Councillors.  As  sentinals  were  placed  "in  all  wayes  & 
passages  so  that  noe  man  could  travell  or  come  from  place  to 
place",  he  could  make  no  effort  to  raise  troops.  Dr.  Pott 
and  the  other  prisoners  were  set  at  liberty.  A  guard  was 
placed  around  Harvey,  ostensibly  to  protect  him,  but  really 
with  the  purpose  of  restraining  him.  A  letter  came  from 
Captain  Purifee,  a  Councillor  then  in  the  "lower  parts"  of 
the  colony,  which  spoke  of  designs  of  the  people  to  bring 
Harvey  to  account  for  his  many  wrongs.  In  alarm  the  Gov- 
ernor consented  to  take  the  first  ship  for  England.  He  en- 
deavored, however,  to  name  his  successor,  to  induce  Matthews, 
Pierce,  and  Minifie  to  go  with  him  to  England,  and  to  secure 
a  promise  from  the  Council  not  to  molest  Maryland.  But  they 
would  consent  to  none  of  these  things. 

In  the  meantime  an  Assembly  had  been  called  to  consider 
the  innumerable  grievances  against  the  Governor.  When 
they  met  at  Jamestown,  Harvey  sent  them  a  letter,  declaring 
the  session  illegal  and  ordering  them  to  disperse  to  their  homes. 
"Notwithstanding  his  threats  .  .  .  the  assembly  proceeded 
according  to  their  former  intentions."  Harvey  then  dispatched 
a  letter  to  the  Council,  ordering  them  to  send  him  his  royal 
commission  and  instructions,  but  these  documents  had  been 
intrusted  to  the  keeping  of  Mr.  Minifie  with  directions  not 
to  surrender  them.  The  Council  then  turned  themselves  to 
the  task  of  selecting  a  successor  to  Harvey.  Their  unanimous 
vote  was  given  to  Captain  Francis  West,  the  senior  member 
of  the  board  and  formerly  Governor.     Feeling  that  since  the 


78  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

expulsion  of  Harvey  had  been  primarily  a  movement  to  pro- 
tect the  rights  of  the  people,  the  Burgesses  should  have  some 
voice  in  the  election  of  the  new  Governor,  they  appealed  to 
the  Assembly  for  the  ratification  of  their  choice.  West  was 
popular  in  the  colony,  and  "the  people's  suffrages"  were  cast 
for  him  as  willingly  as  had  been  those  of  the  Council.  The 
Assembly  then  drew  up  resolutions  setting  forth  the  mis- 
conduct of  Harvey  and  justifying  their  course  in  sending 
him  back  to  England.  These  documents  were  entrusted  to 
one  Thomas  Harwood,  who  was  to  deliver  them  to  the  King. 
Of  what  happened  after  Harvey's  departure  we  have  little 
record,  but  it  is  probable  that  the  colonists  revenged  them- 
selves upon  the  deposed  Governor  by  confiscating  all  his  ill 
gotten  possessions. 

It  was  decided  that  Dr.  Pott  should  go  to  England  to  stand 
trial  as  his  appeal  to  the  King  had  taken  the  case  beyond  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Virginia  courts.  He  and  Harwood  sailed 
upon  the  same  vessel  with  Sir  John.  It  is  not  hard  to  imagine 
with  what  dark  looks  or  angry  words  Pott  and  Harvey  greeted 
each  other  during  their  long  voyage  across  the  Atlantic. 
Doubtless  Harwood  and  Pott  held  many  a  consultation  upon 
what  steps  should  be  taken  when  they  reached  England  to 
secure  a  favorable  hearing  for  the  colony,  and  to  frustrate 
Harvey's  plans  for  revenge.  It  was  Harwood's  intention  to 
hasten  to  London,  in  order  to  forestall  the  Governor  and 
"to  make  friends  and  the  case  good  against  him,  before  he 
could  come".^^  But  Sir  John  was  too  quick  for  him.  Hardly 
had  the  ship  touched  the  dock  at  Plymouth,  than  he  was  off 
to  see  the  mayor  of  the  city.  This  officer,  upon  hearing  of  the 
"late  mutiny  and  rebellion"  in  Virginia,  put  Pott  under  arrest, 
"as  a  principal  author  and  agent  thereof",  and  seized  all  the 
papers  and  letters  that  had  been  entrusted  to  Harwood.  Hav- 
ing thus  gotten  his  hands  upon  the  important  documents, 
Harvey  proceeded  to  London  to  complain  of  the  indignities 
shown  him  and  to  ask  for  the  punishment  of  his  enemies. 

When  Charles  I  learned  that  the  Virginians  had  deposed 
his  Governor  and  sent  him  back  to  England,  he  was  surprised 

•P.  R.  O.,  CO1-8-61. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  79 

and  angered.  It  was,  he  said,  an  assumption  of  regal  power 
to  oust  thus  unceremoniously  one  of  his  officers,  and.  he  was 
resolved  to  send  Harvey  back,  if  for  one  day  only.  And 
should  the  Governor  acquit  himself  of  the  charges  against 
him,  he  was  to  be  inflicted  upon  the  colony  even  longer  than 
had  at  first  been  intended.  The  case  came  before  the  Privy 
Council  in  December  1635.'^^  In  the  charges  that  were  made 
against  Harvey  nothing  was  said  of  the  illegal  and  arbitrary 
measures  that  had  caused  the  people  to  depose  him.  All  ref- 
erence was  omitted  to  the  detaining  of  the  Assembly's  letter, 
to  the  support  given  Maryland,  to  the  abuse  of  the  courts,  to 
illegal  taxes  and  proclamations.  Possibly  the  agents  of  the 
Virginians  felt  that  such  accusations  as  these  would  have  no 
weight  with  the  ministers  of  a  monarch  so  little  in  sympathy 
with  liberal  government,  so  they  trumped  up  other  charges 
to  sustain  their  cause.  Despite  the  assertion  of  Harwood  that 
Harvey  "had  so  carryed  himself  in  Virginia,  that  if  ever  hee 
retourned  back  thither  hee  would  be  pistolled  or  Shott",  he 
was  acquitted  and  restored  to  his  office.  West,  Utie,  Mat- 
thews, Minifie  and  Pierce,  whom  Harvey  designated  as  the 
"chief  actors  in  the  munity",  were  ordered  to  come  to  Eng- 
land, there  to  answer  before  the  Star  Chamber  the  charge  of 
treason. '^^ 

As  the  time  approached  for  him  to  return  to  Virginia,  Har- 
vey began  to  show  symptoms  of  nervousness.  Feeling  possibly 
that  the  threats  of  "pistolling"  were  not  to  be  taken  lightly, 
he  requested  the  King  to  furnish  him  a  royal  vessel  in  which 
to  make  the  journey.  The  appearance  of  one  of  the  King's 
own  ships  in  the  James,  he  thought,  would  "much  abate  the 
bouldness  of  the  offenders".  This  request  was  granted,  and, 
after  some  months  of  delay,  Harvey  set  forth  proudly  in  the 
Black  George.  But  Charles  had  not  cared  to  send  a  really 
serviceable  vessel  to  Virginia,  and  for  a  while  it  seemed  that 
the  Black  George  would  relieve  the  colonists  of  their  troubles 
by  taking  Sir  John  to  the  bottom.  The  vessel,  it  would  appear, 
sprank  a  leak  before  it  had  been  many  hours  at  sea,  and  was 
forced  to  return  to  port.     The  Governor  then  decided  that 

™  P.  R.  O.,  COi-8-62.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-8-61. 


8o  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

a  merchant  vessel  would  suffice  for  his  purposes,  and  set  sail 
again,  upon  a  ship  of  the  Isle  of  Wight. 

He  reached  Point  Comfort  in  January,  1637.  Not  wishing 
to  wait  until  his  ship  reached  Jamestown  before  asserting  his 
authority,  he  landed  at  once  and  established  a  temporary 
capital  at  Elizabeth  City.  He  had  received  instructions  to  re- 
move from  the  Council  all  the  members  that  had  taken  part 
in  the  "thrusting  out",  and  he  brought  with  him  commissions 
for  several  new  members.  Orders  were  issued  immediately 
for  this  reconstructed  Council  to  convene  in  the  church  at 
Elizabeth  City.  There,  after  the  oath  had  been  administered, 
he  published  a  proclamation  of  pardon  to  all  persons  impli- 
cated in  the  "mutiny",  from  which,  however.  West,  Mat- 
thews, and  the  other  leaders  were  excluded.  The  Governor 
then  proceeded  to  displace  all  officials  whom  he  considered 
hostile  to  his  administration.  "Before  I  removed  from  Eliza- 
beth City,"  he  wrote,  "I  appointed  Commissioners  and  sher- 
iffs for  the  lower  counties,  and  for  the  plantation  of  Accomack, 
on  the  other  side  of  the  Bay." 

The  "thrusting  out"  did  not  cause  Harvey  to  become  more 
prudent  in  the  administration  of  the  government.  His  resto- 
ration, which  Charles  had  meant  as  a  vindication  of  the  royal 
authority,  the  Governor  seems  to  have  interpreted  as  a  license 
for  greater  tyranny.  If  the  accusations  of  his  enemies  may 
be  credited,  he  went  to  the  greatest  extremes  in  oppressing 
the  people  and  in  defying  their  laws.  With  the  Council  now 
completely  under  his  control,  he  was  master  of  the  courts,  and 
inflicted  many  great  wrongs  by  means  of  "arbitrary  and  illegal 
proceedings  in  judgment".  Confiscations  and  other  "most 
cruel  oppressions",  it  was  declared,  were  used  to  punish  all 
that  showed  themselves  hostile  to  his  government.  He  and 
his  officers  did  not  scruple  to  impose  many  unjust  fines,  which 
they  converted  "to  their  own  private  use",  nor  to  strike  terror 
into  the  people  with  whippings  and  "cutting  of  ears".*^^ 

Nor  did  Sir  John  neglect  to  take  revenge  upon  those  old 
enemies  that  had  so  defied  and  humiliated  him.  West,  Utie, 
Matthews  and  Pierce  were  sent  at  once  to  England,  and  their 

"  Report  of  Com.  on  Hist.  Mans.  3. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  8i 

goods,  cattle  and  servants  seized.  Beyond  doubt  it  was  against 
Samuel  Matthews  that  Harvey  bore  the  most  bitter  animosity, 
and  it  was  his  estate  that  suffered  most.  The  Governor  had 
been  heard  to  say  that  if  one  "stood,  tother  should  fall,  and  if 
hee  swomme,  the  other  should  sinke".  Matthews  was  one 
of  the  wealthiest  men  of  the  colony,  his  property  consisting 
largely  of  cattle,  but  Sir  John  now  swore  that  he  would  not 
leave  him  "worth  a  cow  taile".  At  the  next  session  of  the 
Quarter  Court,  suit  was  entered  against  Matthews  by  one  John 
Woodall,  for  the  recovery  of  certain  cattle.  The  learned 
judges,  upon  investigation,  found  that  in  the  year  1622  Mat- 
thews held  two  cows  rightfully  belonging  to  Woodall.  It  was 
their  opinion  that  the  increase  of  these  cows  "unto  the  year 
1628  .  .  .  might  amount  unto  the  number  of  fifteen".  "Com- 
puting the  increase  of  the  said  fifteen  head  from  the  year 
1628  to  the  time  of  their  inquiry,  they  did  return  the  number 
of  fiftye  head  to  the  said  Woodall."^^ 

When  Matthews  heard  that  his  estate  had  been  seized  and 
"havoc  made  thereof",  he  entered  complaint  with  the  Privy 
Council  and  secured  an  order  requiring  Harvey  to  restore  all 
to  his  agents  in  Virginia.  But  the  Governor  was  most  reluc- 
tant to  give  up  his  revenge  upon  his  old  enemy.  For  seven 
months  he  put  off  the  agents  and  at  last  told  them  that  he  had 
received  new  orders  from  the  Privy  Council,  expressing  satis- 
faction with  what  had  been  done  and  bidding  him  proceed. '^^ 
Thereupon  Secretary  Kemp  and  other  friends  of  the  Governor 
entered  Matthews'  house,  broke  open  the  doors  of  several 
chambers,  ransacked  all  his  trunks  and  chests,  examined  his 
papers,  and  carried  away  a  part  of  his  goods  and  eight  of  his 
servants. ''^^  Soon  after,  however,  Harvey  received  positive 
commands  from  the  Privy  Council  to  make  an  immediate 
restoration  of  all  that  had  been  taken.  In  January,  1639,  he 
wrote  that  he  had  obeyed  their  Lordships  exactly,  by  calling 
a  court  and  turning  over  to  Matthews'  agents  many  of  his 
belongings. '^^  But  Harvey  denied  that  he  had  ever  appropri- 
ated the  estate  to  his  own  use,  and  claimed  that  he  had  been 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-10-14.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COi-9-121. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-9-121.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-6. 


82  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

misrepresented  by  "the  Cunning  texture  of  Captain  Mathews, 
his  complaint". '^'^ 

Among  those  that  felt  most  keenly  the  Governor's  resent- 
ment was  a  certain  clergyman,  Anthony  Panton.  This  man 
had  quarrelled  with  Harvey's  best  friend  and  chief  advisor 
in  the  stormy  days  of  the  expulsion.  Secretary  Matthew  Kemp. 
Panton  had  incurred  Kemp's  undying  resentment  by  calling 
him  a  "jackanapes",  "unfit  for  the  place  of  secretary",  and 
declaring  that  "his  hair-lock  was  tied  up  with  ribbon  as  old 
as  St.  Paul's"."^^  The  belligerent  parson  was  now  brought 
to  trial,  charged  with  "mutinous  speeches  and  disobedience  to 
Sir  John  Harvey",  and  with  disrespect  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury.  His  judges  pronounced  him  guilty  and  inflicted 
a  sentence  of  extreme  rigor.  A  fine  of  £500  was  imposed, 
he  was  forced  to  make  public  submission  in  all  the  parishes  of 
the  colony,  and  was  banished  "with  paynes  of  death  if  he 
returned,  and  authority  to  any  man  whatsoever  to  execute 
him."^» 

In  the  meanwhile  the  Governor's  enemies  in  England  had 
not  been  idle.  Matthews,  Utie,  West  and  Pierce,  upon  land- 
ing in  1637,  had  secured  their  liberty  under  bail,  and  had 
joined  with  Dr.  Pott  in  an  attempt  to  undermine  Harvey's 
influence  at  Court.  Had  Sir  John  sent  witnesses  to  England 
at  once  to  press  the  charges  against  them  before  the  Star 
Chamber,  while  the  matter  was  still  fresh  in  the  memory  of 
the  King,  he  might  have  brought  about  their  conviction  and 
checked  their  plots.  But  he  neglected  the  case,  and  Charles 
probably  forgot  about  it,  so  the  whole  matter  was  referred  to 
the  Lord  Keeper  and  the  Attorney-General  where  it  seems  to 
have  rested.  ^*^  The  exiles  had  no  difficulty  in  finding  promi- 
nent men  willing  to  join  in  an  attack  upon  Harvey.  Before 
many  months  had  passed  they  had  gained  the  active  support 
of  the  "sub-committee"  of  the  Privy  Council  to  which  Virginia 
affairs  were  usually  referred. ^^  Harvey  afterwards  com- 
plained that  members  of  this  committee  were  interested  in  a 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-6.  "Fiske,  Old  Va.,  Vol.  I,  p.  295. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-32.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-73. 

"P.  R,  O.,  COi-io-io. 


THE  EXPULSION  OF  SIR  JOHN  HARVEY  83 

plan  to  establish  a  new  Virginia  Company  and  for  that  reason 
were  anxious  to  bring  discredit  upon  his  governments^  It 
was  not  difficult  to  find  cause  enough  for  removing  Sir  John. 
Reports  of  his  misconduct  were  brought  to  England  by  every 
vessel  from  the  colony.  Numerous  persons,  if  we  may  believe 
the  Governor,  were  "imployed  in  all  parts  of  London  to  be 
spyes",  and  to  "invite  the  meanest  of  the  planters  newly 
come  for  England  into  Taverns",  where  they  made  them  talka- 
tive with  wine  and  invited  them  to  state  their  grievances.®^ 

The  English  merchants  trading  to  Virginia  also  entered 
complaint  before  the  Privy  Council  against  Harvey's  admin- 
istration. They  sought  relief  from  a  duty  of  two  pence  per 
hogshead  on  all  tobacco  exported  from  the  colony,  from  a  fee 
of  six  pence  a  head  on  immigrants,  and  a  requisition  of  powder 
and  shot  laid  upon  vessels  entering  the  James.®"*  The  Privy 
Council,  always  careful  of  the  welfare  of  British  trade,  wrote 
the  Governor  and  the  Council,  demanding  an  explanation  of 
these  duties  and  requiring  an  account  of  the  powder  and  shot. 
Harvey  replied  at  great  length,  justifying  the  duties  and  beg- 
ging their  Lordships  not  to  credit  "the  malitious  untruths  of 
such  who  by  all  means  do  goe  about  and  studie  to  traduce  us". 

But  the  Privy  Council,  not  waiting  to  receive  all  of  Harvey's 
defense,  decided  to  remove  him  and  to  appoint  in  his  place  Sir 
Francis  Wyatt.®^  The  new  Governor  was  directed  to  retain 
the  old  Council  and  to  confirm  Kemp  as  Secretary.®^  But  he 
was  authorized  to  restore  to  Matthews  any  part  of  his  estate 
yet  withheld  from  him,  and  to  reopen  in  the  Virginia  courts 
the  case  against  Anthony  Panton.®'^  The  day  of  reckoning 
had  now  arrived.  When  Wyatt  reached  Virginia,  he  lost 
no  time  in  bringing  Harvey  to  account  for  his  misdeeds.  He 
was  arraigned  before  the  courts,  where  he  was  forced  to 
answer  countless  complaints  of  injustice  and  oppression,  and 
to  restore  to  their  owners  his  ill  gotten  gains.  Kemp  wrote,  in 
March,  1640,  that  Sir  John  was  being  persecuted  with  great 
rigor,  that  most  of  his  estate  had  been  confiscated,  and  at  the 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-io.  **?.  R.  O.,  CO1-10-15. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-s.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO1-10-3. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-43.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-26,  32. 


84  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

next  court  would  assuredly  be  swept  away.**  A  few  weeks 
later  Harvey  wrote  to  Secretary  Windebank,  to  relate  his 
misfortunes.  "I  am  so  narrowly  watched,"  he  complained, 
"that  I  have  scarce  time  of  priviledge  for  these  few  lines, 
which  doe  humbly  crave  of  you  to  acquaint  his  Majesty  how 
much  I  groan  under  the  oppressions  of  my  pre vay ling  enemies, 
by  whom  the  King's  honor  hath  soe  much  suffered  and  who 
are  now  advanced  to  be  my  judges,  and  have  soe  farr  already 
proceeded  against  me  as  to  teare  from  me  my  estate  by  an 
unusuall  way  of  inviting  my  creditors  to  clamour."  He 
wished  to  return  to  England,  there  to  repair  his  fortunes  and 
seek  revenge  upon  his  enemies,  but  for  some  time  he  was 
detained  in  Virginia.  The  new  Governor  thought  best  to 
keep  him  in  the  colony  where  it  would  be  difficult  for  him  to 
plot  against  the  administration.  Harvey  wrote,  "I  am  denyed 
my  passage  for  England  notwithstanding  my  many  infirmities 
and  weaknesses  of  body  doe  crave  advice  and  help  beyond  the 
skill  and  judgment  which  this  place  can  give."*® 

"Sir  John  being  .  .  .  layed  flatt,"  the  Governor  next  turned 
his  attention  to  Kemp.®*^  Sir  Francis,  who  had  strong  reasons 
for  hating  the  Secretary,  summoned  him  into  court  to  explain 
his  offenses  against  Anthony  Panton.  Realizing  that  he  had 
little  hope  of  clearing  himself,  Kemp  sought  to  leave  for  Eng- 
land, but  his  enemies  restrained  him.  "I  am  extremely  in- 
jured," he  wrote  in  April,  1640,  "and  shall  suffer  without 
guilt,  unless  my  friends  now  assist  me,  .  .  .  the  Governor 
and  Council  here  ,  .  ,     aim  at  my  ruin."®^ 

But  Wyatt  feared  to  retain  Harvey  and  Kemp  permanently 
in  Virginia,  Both  had  powerful  friends  who  might  take  the 
matter  before  the  King  or  the  Privy  Council.  So,  in  the  end, 
both  made  their  way  to  England,  taking  with  them  the  charter 
and  many  important  letters  and  records.®^  It  was  now  their 
turn  to  plot  and  intrigue  to  overthrow  the  party  in  power.®^ 
And  so  quickly  did  their  efforts  meet  success  that  before 
Wyatt  had  been  in  office  two  years  he  was  recalled  and  Sir 
William  Berkeley  made  Governor  in  his  place. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-10-61.  »» P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-67. 

-P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-64.  I.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-io-64. 

•*  Report  of  Com.  on  Hist.  Man.,  3.    **  Report  of  Com.  on  Hist,  Man.,  3, 


CHAPTER  IV 
Governor  Berkeley  and  the  Commonwealth 

Sir  William  Berkeley,  who  succeeded  Governor  Wyatt  in 
1642,  is  one  of  the  striking  figures  of  American  colonial  his- 
tory. Impulsive,  brave,  dogmatic,  unrelenting,  his  every  action 
is  full  of  interest.  He  early  displayed  a  passionate  devotion 
to  the  house  of  Stuart,  which  remained  unshaken  amid  the 
overthrow  of  the  monarchy  and  the  triumph  of  its  enemies. 
When  the  British  Commons  had  brought  the  unhappy  King 
to  the  block,  Berkeley  denounced  them  as  lawless  tyrants  and 
pledged  his  allegiance  to  Charles  II.  And  when  the  Common- 
wealth sent  ships  and  men  to  subdue  the  stubborn  Governor, 
they  found  him  ready,  with  his  raw  colonial  militia,  to  fight  for 
the  prince  that  England  had  repudiated.  Throughout  his  life 
his  chief  wish  was  to  win  the  approbation  of  the  King,  his 
greatest  dread  to  incur  his  censure. 

Berkeley  did  not  know  fear.  When,  in  1644,  the  savages 
came  murdering  through  the  colony,  it  was  he  that  led  the 
planters  into  the  forests  to  seek  revenge.  In  1666,  when  a 
Dutch  fleet  sailed  into  the  James  and  captured  a  number  of 
English  vessels,  the  Governor  wished  to  sally  out  in  person 
with  a  few  merchantmen  to  punish  their  temerity. 

He  possessed  many  of  the  graces  of  the  courtier,  and  seems 
to  have  charmed,  when  he  so  desired,  those  with  whom  he 
came  in  contact.  His  friends  are  most  extravagant  in  his 
praises,  and  their  letters  refer  to  him  as  the  model  soldier, 
statesman  and  gentleman. 

The  overthrow  of  Sir  Francis  Wyatt  was  a  severe  blow  to 
the  enemies  of  the  old  Harvey  faction.  Anthony  Panton  en- 
tered a  protest  against  the  change  of  administration,  claiming 
that  it  had  been  brought  about  by  surreptitious  means  and  that 
no  just  complaint  could  be  made  against  Governor  Wyatt. ^    At 

*  Report  of  Commission  on  Hist.  Manuscripts.    3. 

85 


66  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

his  petition  Berkeley  was  ordered  to  postpone  his  departure 
for  Virginia  until  the  matter  could  be  investigated  further. 
Upon  signing  an  agreement,  however,  to  protect  the  interests 
of  Wyatt  and  his  friends,  he  was  allowed  to  sail  and  reached 
the  colony  in  1642. 

The  new  Governor  soon  showed  that  he  had  no  intention  of 
persecuting  Harvey's  enemies,  or  of  continuing  the  bitter 
quarrels  of  the  preceding  administrations.  In  his  first  Council 
we  find  Samuel  Matthews,  William  Pierce  and  George  Minifie, 
all  of  whom  had  been  implicated  in  the  "thrusting  out".^ 
Whether  proceeding  under  directions  from  the  English  gov- 
ernment, or  actuated  by  a  desire  to  rule  legally  and  justly,  he 
conferred  a  priceless  blessing  upon  the  colony  by  refusing  to 
use  the  judiciary  for  political  persecution.  So  far  as  we  can 
tell  there  was  no  case,  during  his  first  administration,  in  which 
the  courts  were  prostituted  to  personal  or  party  ends.  Thomas 
Ludwell  afterwards  declared  that  it  was  a  convincing  evidence 
of  Berkeley's  prudence  and  justice  that  after  the  surrender  to 
the  Commonwealth,  when  his  enemies  might  easily  have 
hounded  him  to  his  ruin,  "there  was  not  one  man  that  either 
publickly  or  privately  charged  him  with  injustice".^  In 
March,  1643,  he  affixed  his  signature  to  a  law  allowing  appeals 
from  the  Quarter  Courts  to  the  Assembly.  This  right,  which 
seems  not  to  have  been  acknowledged  by  Sir  John  Harvey, 
was  of  the  very  highest  importance.  It  gave  to  the  middle 
class  a  share  in  the  administration  of  justice  and  afforded  an 
effectual  check  upon  the  abuse  of  the  courts  by  the  Governor 
and  Council. 

Berkeley  greatly  endeared  himself  to  the  poor  planters  by 
securing  the  abolition  of  a  f>oll  tax  that  contributed  to  the 
payment  of  his  own  salary.*  "This,"  the  Assembly  declared, 
"is  a  benefit  descending  unto  us  and  our  posterity  which  we 
acknowledge  contributed  to  us  by  our  present  Governor."'' 
Berkeley  also  made  an  earnest  effort  to  relieve  the  burden 
of  the  poor  by  substituting  for  the  levy  upon  tithables  "as- 
sessments proportioning  in  some  measure  payments  according 

•Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  235.  »P.  R.  O.,  COi-20. 

*Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  236,  2yj.  'Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  236,  237, 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      87 

to  mens  abilities  and  estates".  But  the  colonial  legislators  soon 
found  a  just  distribution  of  the  taxes  a  matter  of  great  diffi- 
culty, and  we  are  told  that  the  new  measures,  "through  the 
strangeness  thereof  could  not  but  require  much  time  of  con- 
troverting and  debating".®  In  1648  the  experiment  was 
abandoned  and  the  old  oppressive  tax  upon  tithables  revived. ''^ 

During  the  first  administration  of  Berkeley  numerous  other 
measures  were  adopted  tending  to  augment  the  liberty  and 
prosperity  of  the  people.  In  1643  ^  ^^w  was  passed  prohibit- 
ing the  Governor  and  Council  from  imposing  taxes  without 
the  consent  of  the  Assembly.^  At  the  same  session  Berkeley 
assented  to  a  statute  exempting  the  Burgesses  from  arrest 
during  sessions  of  Assembly  and  for  ten  days  after  dissolu- 
tion.^ The  fees  of  the  Secretary  of  State  were  limited  and 
fixed  in  order  to  prevent  excessive  and  unjust  charges  by  that 
officer.  i« 

That  the  colonists  were  not  insensible  of  the  Governor's 
liberal  conduct  is  shown  by  their  generosity  to  him  on  more 
than  one  occasion.  In  1642  they  presented  him  with  an  "or- 
chard with  two  houses  belonging  to  the  collony  ...  as  a  free 
and  voluntary  gift  in  consideration  of  many  worthy  favours 
manifested  towards  the  collony", ^^  In  1643,  when  the  war  in 
England  caused  the  suspension  of  Berkeley's  pensions  and 
allowances  from  the  King,  the  Assembly  voted  a  tax  of  two 
shillings  per  poll  on  all  tithable  persons  as  a  temporary  relief. ^^ 

When  Sir  William  assumed  the  government  in  1642  he  was 
conscious  that  an  effort  was  being  made  in  England  to  restore 
the  old  London  Company  of  Virginia,  and  it  became  his  first 
care  to  thwart  this  design.  In  1639  George  Sandys  had  been 
sent  to  England  as  the  agent  of  the  Assembly  and  had  pre- 
sented a  petition  in  the  name  of  the  Virginia  planters,  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  for  the  restoration  of  the  old  corpora- 
tion.^^ The  Assembly  of  April,  1642,  called  together  by  Ber- 
keley, repudiated  entirely  the  action  of  their  agent,  declaring 

•  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  237.  '  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  356. 

•Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  244.  'Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  263. 

'•Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  265.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  267. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  280,  281.  '"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  230. 


88  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

that  he  had  misunderstood  his  instructions.  The  renewal  of 
the  Company,  they  said,  was  never  "desired,  sought  after  or' 
endeavoured  to  be  sought  for  either  directly  or  indirectly  by 
the  consent  of  any  Grand  Assembly  or  the  common  consent  of 
the  people".  They  drew  up  a  petition  to  the  King,  expressing 
their  desire  to  remain  under  his  immediate  care  and  protection, 
citing  the  many  blessings  of  the  present  order  of  government, 
and  drawing  the  most  melancholy  picture  of  their  sufferings 
before  the  revocation  of  the  charter.  "The  present  happiness," 
they  said,  "is  exemplified  to  us  by  the  freedom  of  yearly  as- 
semblies warranted  unto  us  by  his  majesties  gratious  instruc- 
tions, and  the  legal  trial  per  juries  in  all  criminal  and  civil 
causes  where  it  shall  be  demanded. "^^ 

This  declaration  of  loyalty  and  contentment,  reaching 
Charles  at  a  time  when  so  many  of  his  subjects  were  rising  in 
rebellion  against  his  authority,  was  most  pleasing  to  the  un- 
fortunate monarch.  "Your  acknowledgement,"  he  replied 
to  the  Governor  and  the  Assembly,  "of  our  grace,  bounty,  and 
favour,  towards  you,  and  your  so  earnest  desire  to  continue 
under  our  immediate  protection,  is  very  acceptable  to  us." 
"And,"  he  continued,  "as  we  had  not  before  the  least  intention 
to  consent  to  the  introduction  of  any  company  over  that  our 
Colony,  we  are  by  it  much  confirmed  in  our  resolution,  as 
thinking  it  unfit  to  change  a  form  of  government  wherein 
our  subjects  there  .  .  .  receive  much  contentment  and 
satisfaction.^" 

In  the  early  years  of  Berkeley's  administration  the  colony 
experienced  another  horrible  Indian  massacre.  As  in  1622 
the  blow  came  without  warning.  The  cruel  and  barbarous  war 
that  followed  the  first  massacre  had  long  since  come  to  an  end 
and  for  many  years  there  had  been  peace  between  the  two 
races.  It  is  true  that  the  friendly  relations  that  resulted  from 
the  marriage  of  Rolfe  and  Pocahontas  had  not  been  restored, 
that  the  Indians  were  not  allowed  to  frequent  the  English 
settlements,  that  no  weapons  were  sold  them,  but  the  peace 
was  fairly  well  observed  and  there  was  no  reason  to  suspect 
the  savages  of  treachery, 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  231.  "Va.  Hist.  Reg.,  Vol.  I,  p.  160. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      89 

The  plot  originated  in  the  brain  of  Opechancanough.  This 
remarkable  savage  was  long  supposed  to  have  been  the  brother 
of  Powhatan,  but  newly  discovered  evidence  tends  to  show  that 
this  was  not  the  case.  It  is  known  that  he  belonged  to  a 
foreign  tribe  that  came  from  the  far  southwest.  Having,  it  is 
supposed,  been  defeated  in  a  battle  with  the  Spaniards,  he  had 
led  his  people  to  Virginia  and  united  them  with  the  tribes  under 
the  command  of  Powhatan.  This  tremendous  march  must 
have  consumed  many  months,  and  have  been  beset  with  count- 
less dangers,  but  Opechancanough  overcame  them,  and  "con- 
quered all  along  from  Mexico"  to  Virginia.^^  He  was  now  an 
extremely  aged  man.  Being  unable  to  walk  he  was  carried 
from  place  to  place  upon  a  litter.  His  eyelids  were  so  heavy 
that  he  could  not  of  his  own  volition  move  them,  and  attendants 
stood  always  ready  to  raise  them  whenever  it  became  necessary 
for  him  to  see.^^  But  his  mind  was  clear,  his  force  of  will 
unshaken,  and  the  Indians  paid  him  the  reverent  obedience 
that  his  able  leadership  demanded. 

Opechancanough  planned  the  massacre  for  April  i8th,  1644, 
and  it  was  carried  out  upon  that  date  with  the  utmost  ferocity. ^^ 
The  slaughter  was  even  greater  than  in  1622,  and  no  less  than 
five  hundred  Christians  are  said  to  have  been  destroyed.^® 
But  this  calamity  fell  almost  entirely  upon  the  frontier  coun- 
ties at  the  heads  of  the  great  rivers,  and  upon  the  plantations 
on  the  south  side  of  the  James.  The  savages  could  not  pene- 
trate to  the  older  and  more  populous  communities  of  the  lower 
peninsula.  For  this  reason  the  disaster,  horrible  as  it  was, 
did  not  overwhelm  the  entire  colony  and  threaten  its  destruc- 
tion as  had  the  massacre  of  1622. 

Another  deadly  war  with  the  savages  ensued  immediately. 
Sir  William  Berkeley  several  times  placed  himself  at  the  head 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-6  to  16.  "  Beverley. 

"The  Assembly,  in  1645,  ordered  that  the  i8th  of  April  be  celebrated 
ever  afterwards  for  the  deliverance  of  the  colony  from  the  savages. 
Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  290.  The  year  is  fairly  well  determined  by  the  fact 
that  mention  of  an  Indian  war  occurs  for  the  first  time,  during  this 
period,  in  the  statutes  of  the  session  of  Assembly  of  October,  1644. 
Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  285. 

"  Beverley. 


go  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

of  large  expeditions  and  carried  fire  and  destruction  to  many 
Indian  villages.^*^  As  in  the  former  war,  the  naked  and  poorly' 
armed  natives  could  not  withstand  the  English,  and,  deserting 
their  homes,  they  usually  fled  into  the  woods  at  their  approach. 
And  again  the  white  men  brought  famine  upon  them  by  going 
out  each  year  in  the  months  of  July  and  August  to  cut  down 
their  growing  maize.^^  In  order  to  protect  the  isolated  fron- 
tier plantations  the  Governor  ordered  the  people  to  draw 
together  in  fortified  camps,  strong  enough  to  resist  the  assaults 
of  a  large  body  of  the  savages.^^  "He  strengthened  the  weak 
Families,"  it  was  said,  "by  joining  two  or  three  .  .  .  together 
and  Palizaded  the  houses  about."^^ 

Despite  these  wise  measures  the  savages  would  probably 
have  continued  the  war  many  years  had  not  Opechancanough 
fallen  into  the  hands  of  the  English.  The  old  king  was  sur- 
prised by  Sir  William  Berkeley,  and,  because  of  his  decrepitude, 
was  easily  captured.^^  He  was  taken  in  triumph  to  Jamestown, 
where  the  Governor  intended  to  keep  him  until  he  could  be  sent 
to  England  and  brought  before  Charles  I.  But  a  few  days 
after  the  capture,  a  common  soldier,  in  revenge  for  the  harm 
done  the  colony  by  Opechancanough,  shot  the  aged  and  help- 
less prisoner  in  the  back.^^ 

Soon  after  this  event  the  Indians  sued  for  peace.  Dis- 
couraged and  starving,  they  promised  to  become  the  friends 
and  allies  of  the  whites  forever,  if  they  would  cease  their  hos- 
tility and  grant  them  their  protection.  A  treaty  was  drawn 
up  and  ratified  by  the  Assembly  and  by  the  new  Indian  king 
Necotowance.^®  It  provided  that  the  savages  should  acknowl- 
edge the  King  of  England  as  their  sovereign  and  overlord; 
that  Necotowance  and  his  successors  should  pay  as  tribute 
"the  number  of  twenty  beaver  skins  at  the  goeing  of  the  Geese 
yearly";  that  all  the  land  between  the  York  and  the  James 
from  the  falls  of  both  rivers  to  Kecoughtan  should  be  ceded  to 
the  English ;  that  all  white  prisoners  and  escaped  negroes  should 
be  returned.     In  compensation  the  English  agreed  to  protect 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-71 ;  CO1-41-111.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-6  to  16. 

''C05-I37I-6  to  16.  ^COs-1371-6  to  16. 

**P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-111.  ''Beverley. 
**Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  323. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      91 

the  savages  from  the  attacks  of  their  enemies  and  to  resign  to 
them  as  their  hunting  ground  the  territory  north  of  the 
York  River. 2''^  This  peace,  which  was  most  beneficial  to  the 
colony,  was  not  broken  until  1676,  when  the  incursions  of  the 
wild  Susquehannocks  involved  the  native  Virginia  tribes  in  a 
new  conflict  with  the  white  men.^* 

During  the  civil  war  that  was  at  this  time  convulsing  Eng- 
land most  of  the  influential  Virginia  planters  adhered  to  the 
party  of  the  King.  They  were,  with  rare  exceptions,  members 
of  the  established  church,  and  could  have  little  sympathy  with 
a  movement  that  was  identified  with  dissenters.  If  the  triumph 
of  Parliament  was  to  bring  about  the  disestablishment  of  the 
Church,  or  even  the  toleration  of  Presbyterians  and  Indepen- 
dents, they  could  not  give  them  their  support.  Moreover, 
loyalty  to_  the_H_ouse  of  Stuart  was  strong  in  Virginia.  The 
very  remoteness  of  the  planters  Trom  the  King  increased  their 
reverence  and  love.  They  could  not  be  present  at  court  to  see 
the  monarch  in  all  his  human  weakness,  so  there  was  nothing 
to  check  their  loyal  imaginations  from  depicting  him  as  the 
embodiment  of  princely  perfection.  Nor  had  the  wealthy 
families  of  the  colony  aught  to  anticipate  of  economic  or 
political  gain  in  the  triumph  of  Parliament.  Possessed  of  large 
estates,  monopolizing  the  chief  governmental  offices,  wielding 
a  great  influence  over  the  Assembly  and  the  courts,  and  looking 
forward  to  a  future  of  prosperity  and  power,  they  could  not 
risk  their  all  upon  the  uncertain  waters  of  revolution.  Some, 
no  doubt,  sympathized  with  the  efforts  that  were  being  made 
in  England  to  limit  the  King's  power  of  taxing  the  people, 
for  the  colony  had  always  contained  its  quota  of  liberals,  but 
the  dictates  of  self-interest  must  have  lulled  them  into  qui- 
escence. And  the  Governor,  in  this  hour  of  need,  proved  a 
veritable  rock  of  loyalty  for  the  King.  None  that  showed 
leanings  towards  the  cause  of  Parliament  could  expect  favors 
of  any  kind  from  Sir  William  Berkeley.  Moreover,  if  they 
spoke  too  loudly  of  the  rights  of  the  people  and  of  the  tyranny 
of  monarchs,  they  might  find  themselves  under  arrest  and 
charged  with  treason. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I.  p.  323.  "^  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-71. 


92  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

But  there  was  another  faction  in  Virginia,  composed  largely 
of  small  planters  and  freedmen,  which  sympathized  with  the- 
aims  of  their  fellow  commons  of  the  mother  country.  Promi- 
nent among  these  must  have  been  a  small  number  of  Virginia 
Puritans,  who  had  for  some  years  been  subjected  to  mild  perse- 
cution. The  overwhelming  sentiment  of  the  colony  had  long 
been  for  strict  uniformity  in  the  Church  "as  neere  as  may  be 
to  the  canons  in  England",  and  several  statutes  had  been  passed 
by  the  Assembly  to  suppress  the  Quakers  and  Puritans.^®  In 
1642,  Richard  Bennett  and  others  of  strong  Calvinistic  lean- 
ings, sent  letters  to  Boston  requesting  that  Puritan  ministers 
be  sent  to  Virginia,  to  minister  to  their  non-conformist 
congregations.^^  The  New  Englanders  responded  readily, 
despatching  to  their  southern  friends  three  ministers  of  dis- 
tinction— William  Thompson,  John  Knowles  and  Thomas 
James.  Despite  the  laws  against  non-conformity  these  men 
anticipated  little  interference  with  their  work  and  even  brought 
letters  of  introduction  from  Governor  Winthrop  to  Sir  William 
Berkeley.^^  Little  did  they  know  the  temper  of  the  new  Vir- 
ginia Governor.  So  far  from  welcoming  this  Puritan  invasion 
Berkeley  determined  to  meet  it  with  measures  of  stern 
repression.  A  bill  was  put  through  the  Assembly  requiring 
all  ministers  within  the  colony  to  conform  to  the  "orders  and 
constitutions  of  the  church  of  England",  both  in  public  and  in 
private  worship,  and  directing  the  Governor  and  Council  to 
expel  all  dissenters  from  the  country.  ^^  Disheartened  at  this 
unfriendly  reception,  James  and  Knowles  soon  returned  to 
New  England,  leaving  Thompson  to  carry  on  the  work.  This 
minister,  in  defiance  of  the  law,  lingered  long  in  Virginia, 
preaching  often  and  making  many  converts. 

Among  those  that  embraced  the  Calvinistic  tenets  at  this 
time  was  Thomas  Harrison,  formerly  Berkeley's  chaplain. 
Harrison  seems  to  have  regarded  the  massacre  of  1644  as  a 
judgment  of  God  upon  the  colonists  for  their  persecution  of  the 
Puritans.  His  desertion  of  the  established  Church  aroused 
both  the  anger  and  the  alarm  of  the  Governor  and  in  1648  he 

"  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  123,  149,  277.  **  Bruce,  Inst.  Hist,  Vol.  I,  p.  254. 

"  Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  254.      "  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  277. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      93 

was  expelled  from  his  parish  for  refusing  to  use  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer.    Later  he  left  the  colony  for  New  England. 

This  persecution,  although  not  severe  enough  to  stamp  out 
dissent  in  Virginia,  could  but  arouse  among  the  Puritans  a 
profound  dissatisfaction  with  the  existing  government,  and 
a  desire  to  cooperate  with  their  brethren  of  England  in  the 
great  contest  with  the  King.  Although  not  strong  enough  to 
raise  the  Parliamentary  standard  in  the  colony  and  to  seek 
religious  freedom  at  the  sword's  point,  the  Puritans  formed  a 
strong  nucleus  for  a  party  of  opposition  to  the  King  and  his 
Governor. 

Moreover,  in  addition  to  the  comparatively  small  class  of 
Puritans,  there  must  have  been  in  the  colony  hundreds  of 
men,  loyal  to  the  established  church,  who  yet  desired  a  more 
liberal  government  both  in  England  and  in  Virginia.  A  strong 
middle  class  was  developing  which  must  have  looked  with 
sympathy  upon  the  cause  of  the  English  Commons  and  with 
jealousy  upon  the  power  of  the  Virginia  Governor  and  his 
Council.  There  is  positive  evidence  that  many  poor  men  had 
been  coming  to  Virginia  from  very  early  times,  paying  their 
own  passage  and  establishing  themselves  as  peasant  proprietors. 
Wills  still  preserved  show  the  existence  at  this  period  of  many 
little  farms  of  five  or  six  hundred  acres,  scattered  among  the 
great  plantations  of  the  wealthy.  They  were  tilled,  not  by 
servants  or  by  slaves,  but  by  the  freemen  that  owned  them. 
Depending  for  food  upon  their  own  cattle,  hogs,  corn,  fruit  and 
vegetables,  and  for  the  other  necessities  of  life  upon  their 
little  tobacco  crops,  the  poor  farmers  of  Virginia  were  devel- 
oping into  intelligent  and  useful  citizens.  They  constituted 
the  backbone  of  a  distinct  and  powerful  middle  class,  which 
even  at  this  early  period,  had  to  be  reckoned  with  by  aristo- 
cracy and  Governor  and  King. 

This  section  of  the  population  was  constantly  being  recruited 
from  the  ranks  of  the  indentured  servants.  The  plantations  of 
the  rich  were  tilled  chiefly  by  bonded  laborers,  brought  from 
the  mother  country.  So  long  as  land  was  plentiful  in  Virginia 
the  chief  need  of  the  wealthy  was  for  labor.  Wage  earners 
could  not  supply  this  need,  for  the  poor  man  would  not  till  the 


94  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

fields  of  others  when  he  could  have  land  of  his  own  almost  for 
the  asking.  So  the  planters  surmounted  this  difficulty  by 
bringing  workmen  to  the  colony  under  indenture,  to  work 
upon  their  farms  for  a  certain  number  of  years.  Many  a  poor 
Englishman,  finding  the  struggle  for  existence  too  severe  at 
home,  thus  surrendered  for  a  while  his  liberty,  that  in  the  end 
he  might  acquire  a  share  in  the  good  things  of  the  New  World. 
After  serving  his  master  five  or  six  years  the  servant  usually 
was  given  his  liberty  and  with  it  fifty  acres  of  land  and  a  few 
farm  implements.  Thus  equipped,  he  could,  with  industry  and 
frugality,  acquire  property  and  render  himself  a  useful  citizen 
in  his  adopted  country.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  many 
hundreds  of  former  servants,  become  prosperous,  did  unite 
with  the  free  immigrants  of  humble  means  to  form  a  vigorous 
middle  class. 

Nothing  could  be  more  natural  than  that  the  small  farmers 
should  regard  Parliament  as  the  champion  of  the  poor  Eng- 
lishman at  home  and  in  the  colony.  They  knew  full  well  that 
if  Charles  should  triumph  over  the  Commons,  his  victory  would 
mean  greater  power  for  their  Governor,  greater  privilege 
for  the  wealthy  planters.  On  the  other  hand,  the  King's  defeat 
might  bring  increased  influence  to  the  middle  class  and  to  the 
Burgesses. 

It  is  not  possible  to  determine  how  numerous  was  the  Parlia- 
mentary party  in  Virginia,  but  the  faction  was  powerful 
enough  to  cause  serious  apprehension  to  the  loyalists.  So 
bitter  was  the  feeling  that  fears  of  assassination  were  enter- 
tained for  Sir  William  Berkeley,  and  a  guard  of  ten  men  was 
granted  him.  We  are  "sensible",  declared  the  Assembly,  in 
1648,  "of  the  many  disaffections  to  the  government  from  a 
schismaticall  party,  of  whose  intentions  our  native  country  of 
England  hath  had  and  yet  hath  too  sad  experience". ^^ 

But  the  commons  of  Virginia  were  not  prepared  to  raise  the 
standard  of  revolt.  They  must  have  lacked  organization  and 
leaders.  Most  of  the  aristocracy  and  wealth  of  Virginia  was 
arrayed  against  them,  while  the  government  was  in  the  hands 
of  a  man  noted  for  his  passionate  attachment  to  the  Throne. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  355. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      95 

The  Parliamentary  party  must  have  felt  it  best  to  await  the 
event  of  the  struggle  in  England,  pinning  their  hopes  upon  the 
success  of  their  comrades  there.  But  even  after  Parliament 
had  won  the  victory,  after  the  King  had  been  executed,  they 
were  not  strong  enough  to  overthrow  Berkeley's  government 
and  force  Virginia  into  obedience  to  the  Commonwealth. 

The  news  of  the  death  of  Charles  I  filled  the  royalists  of 
Virginia  with  grief  and  anger.  It  seemed  to  them  that  the 
cause  of  law  and  order  and  religion  in  the  unhappy  kingdom 
had  fallen  with  their  monarch.  "Moreover,  they  could  but  ex- 
pect the  victorious  party,  after  settling  all  at  home,  to  extend 
their  arms  to  the  little  colony  and  force  upon  them  a  reluctant 
obedience  to  the  new  government.  But  the  intrepid  Berkeley- 
was  determined  never  to  submit  until  compelled  to  do  so  by 
force  of  arms.  Charles  II  was  proclaimed  King.  The  As- 
sembly was  called  together  and  a  law  enacted  declaring  it  high 
treason  to  question,  even  by  insinuation,  the  "undoubted  & 
inherent  right  of  his  Majesty  ...  to  the  Collony  of  Virginia, 
and  all  other  his  majesties  dominions".^'*  The  Assembly  re- 
ferred to  Charles  I  in  terms  of  reverence  and  affection,  as  their 
late  blessed  and  sainted  King,  and,  unmindful  of  consequences, 
denounced  his  executioners  as  lawless  tyrants.  For  any  person 
to  cast  dishonor  or  censure  upon  the  fallen  monarch,  or  to 
uphold  in  any  way  the  proceedings  against  him,  or  to  assert 
the  legality  of  his  dethronement,  was  declared  by  the  Assembly 
high  treason.  "And  it  is  also  enacted,"  they  continued,  "that 
what  person  soever,  by  false  reports  and  malicious  rumors  shall 
spread  abroad,  among  the  people,  any  thing  tending  to  change 
of  government,  .  .  .  such  persons,  not  only  the  authors 
of  .  ,  .  but  the  reporters  and  divulgers  thereof,  shall  be 
adjudged  guilty."^^ 

Even  before  the  news  of  these  events  reached  England,  Sir 
William  had  aroused  the  anger  of  Parliament  by  his  persecu- 
tion of  the  Puritans.  Some  of  the  people  of  Nansemond 
county  had  written,  complaining  of  the  banishment  of  Mr. 
Harrison,  whom  they  described  as  an  able  minister  and  a  man 
of  splendid  character.     The  English  Council  wrote  Berkeley 

■"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  360.  ''Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  361. 


96  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

commanding  him  to  restore  Mr.  Harrison  to  his  parish.  "Wee 
know,"  they  said,  "you  cannot  be  ignorant  that  the  use  of  the 
common  prayer  book  is  prohibited  by  the  parHament  of  Eng- 
land. "^^  And  when  they  learned  that  the  colony  had  refused 
to  acknowledge  the  Commonwealth,  and  still  adhered  to  the 
House  of  Stuart,  they  were  determined  to  punish  the  Virgin- 
ians for  their  temerity.  Since  it  would  be  exceedingly  in- 
convenient at  this  time  of  uncertainty  and  change  to  send  an 
expedition  across  the  Atlantic,  it  was  decided  to  bring  the 
colonists  to  their  senses  by  cutting  off  their  foreign  trade.  An 
act  was  passed  by  Parliament  in  October,  1650,  declaring  that 
since  the  colony  had  been  settled  by  the  English  at  great  cost 
to  the  nation,  it  should  rightly  be  under  the  authority  of  the 
present  government;  that  divers  persons  in  Virginia  had  com- 
mitted open  treason,  "traytorously  by  force  and  Subtilty" 
usurping  the  government  and  defying  the  Commonwealth ;  and 
in  order  to  repress  speedily  the  rebellious  colonists  and  to 
inflict  upon  them  a  merited  punishment,  they  were  to  be  for- 
bidden all  "Commerce  or  Traffique  with  any  people  Whatso- 
ever". The  full  force  of  the  English  navy  was  to  be  used  in 
carrying  out  this  act,  and  all  commanders  were  directed  to 
seize  and  bring  in  foreign  vessels  found  trading  with  the 
colony.  No  English  ships  were  to  sail  for  Virginia  without 
special  license  from  the  Council  of  State.^^ 

This  was  a  dire  threat  indeed.  To  cut  off  all  commerce  with 
England  and  foreign  countries  would  bring  utter  ruin  upon  the 
planters,  for  their  tobacco  crop  would  then  be  without  a  market. 
Even  now,  however,  the  Governor  did  not  falter  in  his  loyalty. 
He  felt,  no  doubt,  that  Parliament  would  have  difficulty  in 
enforcing  this  act,  and  he  looked  to  the  Dutch  merchantmen 
to  take  off  the  tobacco. 

Before  an  Assembly  called  together  in  March,  1651,  Ber- 
keley delivered  an  address  ringing  with  defiance  of  Parliament. 
"Gentlemen,"  he  said,  "you  perceave  by  the  Declaration  that 
the  men  of  Westminster  have  set  out,  .  .  .  how  they  meane  to 
deale  with  you  hereafter.  .  .  .  Indeed  me  thinks  they  might 
have  proposed  something  to  us  which  might  have  strengthened 

"Sp.  Dom.  Inter.,  1-94.  "  Scobell,  Vol.   II,  p.   132. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      97 

US  to  beare  those  heavy  chaines  they  are  making  ready  for  us, 
though  it  were  but  an  assurance  that  we  shall  eat  the  bread  for 
which  our  owne  Oxen  plow,  and  with  our  owne  sweat  we 
reape;  but  this  assurance  (it  seems)  were  a  franchise  beyond 
the  Condition  they  have  resolv'd  on  the  Question  we  ought  to 
be  in :  For  the  reason  why  they  talk  so  Magisterially  to  us  is 
this,  we  are  forsooth  their  worships  slaves,  bought  with  their 
money  and  by  consequence  ought  not  to  buy,  or  sell  but  with 
those  they  shall  Authorize  with  a  few  trifles  to  Coszen  us  of  all 
for  which  we  toile  and  labour.  .  .  .  The  strength  of  their 
argument  runs  onely  thus :  we  have  laid  violent  hands  on  your 
Land-lord,  possessed  his  Manner  house  where  you  used  to 
pay  your  rents,  therefore  now  tender  your  respects  to  the  same 
house  you  once  reverenced.  .  .  .  They  talke  indeed  of  money 
laid  out  in  this  country  in  its  infancy.  I  will  not  say  how  little, 
nor  how  Centuply  repaid,  but  will  onely  aske,  was  it  theirs? 
They  who  in  the  beginning  of  this  warr  were  so  poore,  & 
indigent,  that  the  wealth  and  rapines  of  three  Kingdomes  & 
their  Churches  too  cannot  yet  make  rich." 

The  Governor  then  began  an  impassioned  appeal  to  the  As- 
sembly to  remain  firm  in  their  loyalty  to  the  Crown.  "Surely 
Gentlemen,"  he  cried,  "we  are  more  slaves  by  nature,  than 
their  power  can  make  us  if  we  suffer  ourselves  to  be  shaken 
with  these  paper  bulletts,  &  those  on  my  life  are  the  heaviest 
they  either  can  or  will  send  us.  .  .  .  You  have  heard  under 
what  heavy  burthens  the  afflicted  English  Nation  now  groans, 
and  calls  to  heaven  for  relief :  how  new  and  formerly  unheard 
of  impositions  make  the  wifes  pray  for  barrenness  and  their 
husbands  deafnes  to  exclude  the  cryes  of  their  succourles,  starv- 
ing children.  .  .  .  Consider  your  selves  how  happy  you  are 
and  have  been,  how  the  Gates  of  wealth  and  Honour  are  shut 
to  no  man,  and  that  there  is  not  here  an  Arbitrary  hand  that 
dares  to  touch  the  substance  of  either  poore  or  rich :  But  that 
which  I  woud  have  you  chiefly  consider  with  thankfullnes  is : 
That  God  hath  separated  you  from  the  guilt  of  the  crying  bloud 
of  our  Pious  Souveraigne  of  ever  blessed  memory :  But  mis- 
take not  Gentlemen  part  of  it  will  yet  stain  your  garments  if 
you  willingly  submit  to  those  murtherers  hands  that  shed  it ;  I 


98  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

tremble  to  thinke  how  the  oathes  they  will  impose  will  make 
those  guilty  of  it,  that  have  long  abhor'd  the  traiterousness"e 
of  the  act.  .  .  .  Gentlemen  by  the  Grace  of  God  we  will  not 
so  tamely  part  with  our  King,  and  all  these  blessings  we  enjoy 
under  him;  and  if  they  oppose  us,  do  but  follow  me,  I  will 
either  lead  you  to  victory,  or  lose  a  life  which  I  cannot  more 
gloriously  sacrifice  then  for  my  loyalty,  and  your  security."^^ 

When  the  Governor  had  completed  his  appeal  the  obnoxious 
act  of  Parliament  was  read  aloud.  The  Assembly  then  passed  a 
series  of  resolutions,  reiterating  their  loyalty  to  the  Crown, 
denouncing  the  Commons  as  usurpers  and  regicides,  and  de- 
fending themselves  against  the  charge  of  treachery  and  rebel- 
lion. They  had,  they  declared,  adhered  always  to  the  "Lawes 
of  England",  which  enjoined  upon  them  the  oaths  of  allegiance 
and  supremacy,  and  they  refused  now,  at  the  bidding  of  Parlia- 
ment, to  break  their  word  by  renouncing  their  King.  They 
could  not  be  expected  to  give  passive  obedience  to  every  party 
that  possessed  themselves  of  Westminster  Hall,  where  the 
heads  of  divers  factions  had  followed  each  other  in  quick  suc- 
cession. They  had  been  accused  of  usurping  the  government 
of  the  colony,  but  their  records  would  show  that  they  had 
never  swerved  from  their  allegiance.  And  it  ill  became  the  Par- 
liament that  had  overthrown  the  English  constitution  to  bring 
such  accusations.  Finally,  they  declared,  "we  are  resolv'd  to 
Continue  our  Allegeance  to  our  most  Gratious  King,  yea  as 
long  as  his  gratious  favour  permits  us,  we  will  peaceably  trade 
with  the  Londoners,  and  all  other  nations  in  amity  with  our 
Soveraigne :  Protect  all  f orraigne  Merchants  with  our  utmost 
force  in  our  Capes :  Allwaies  pray  for  the  happy  restoration 
of  our  King,  and  repentance  in  them,  who  to  the  hazard  of 
their  soules  have  opposed  him."^^ 

As  Berkeley  had  foreseen,  the  English  found  it  impossible 
to  enforce  a  strict  blockade.  The  government  could  not  spare 
war  vessels  enough  to  close  the  Virginia  capes,  and  foreign 
merchantmen  continued  to  sail  unmolested  into  the  James  and 
the  York,  bringing  goods  to  the  planters  and  taking  off  their 
tobacco.     Indeed  the  Dutch  took  advantage  of  this  quarrel 

»Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I.,  p.  77.  "'Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  75  to  81. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH      99 

between  colony  and  mother  country  to  extend  their  American 
trade  at  the  expense  of  the  English  merchants.  The  Council  of 
State  was  soon  made  to  realize  by  the  complaints  that  poured 
in  from  the  London  shippers,  that  the  "Blockade  Act"  was 
injuring  England  more  than  the  refractory  colony. 

At  this  moment,  several  leaders  of  the  Virginia  Parliamen- 
tary party  came  to  the  Council  at  Westminster  and  repre- 
sented to  it  the  necessity  of  fitting  out  an  expedition  to 
overthrow  the  Berkeley  government.  They  could  plead  that 
the  blockade  had  proved  ineffective,  that  the  honor  of  the  Com- 
monwealth demanded  the  prompt  subjection  of  the  impudent 
Governor,  that  the  cooperation  of  the  Virginia  commons 
would  make  the  task  easy.  Nor  could  they  omit  to  remind  the 
Councillors  that  it  was  their  duty  to  bring  relief  to  their 
fellow  Puritans  of  Virginia. 

At  all  events  the  Council,  seeing  the  necessity  of  prompt 
action,  sent  forth  a  well  armed  expedition  under  the  command 
of  Captain  Robert  Denis  to  subdue  both  the  Barbadoes  and 
Virginia.  But  wishing  to  avoid,  if  possible,  oi>en  hostilities, 
at  the  same  time  they  sent  commissioners  to  treat  with  the 
colonists  and  persuade  them  to  submit  peaceably  to  the  Com- 
monwealth. The  Council  of  State  evidently  expected  active 
assistance  from  the  Parliamentary  party  in  the  colony  in  these 
efforts  to  establish  the  new  political  order,  for  they  gave  di- 
rections to  the  commissioners  to  raise  troops  in  the  plantations, 
to  appoint  captains  and  other  officers,  and  to  guarantee  free- 
dom to  all  servants  that  volunteered  to  fight  with  the  Common- 
wealth forces.  They  were  given  power  to  grant  pardon  to  all 
that  submitted,  making  such  exceptions  as  they  thought  proper, 
and  were  directed  to  establish  a  new  government  in  accord 
with  the  present  constitution  of  England. 

When,  in  the  spring  of  1652,  the  British  fleet  sailed  up  the 
James  river.  Captain  Denis  found  the  intrepid  Berkeley  pre- 
pared for  a  strenuous  resistance.  With  the  guns  of  the  war- 
ships approaching  his  capital,  with  English  soldiers  ready  for 
a  landing,  with  a  strong  party  in  the  colony  in  sympathy  with 
the  invaders,  he  might  well  have  despaired.  Resistance  would 
certainly    entail    enormous    misfortunes    upon    the    colony — 


100  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

bloodshed,  devastation,  civil  strife — and  success  could  be  but 
temporary.  Should  he  beat  off  the  present  expedition,  others 
too  powerful  to  be  resisted  would  undoubtedly  follow,  and 
the  punishment  of  the  colony  would  be  but  the  more  severe. 

Yet  the  Governor  did  not  falter.  He  called  around  him  the 
full  strength  of  the  colonial  militia,  posted  them  to  good  ad- 
vantage, and  himself  took  active  command.  Several  Dutch 
vessels  that  had  been  trading  in  the  James  were  pressed  into 
service,  filled  with  men  and  moored  in  close  to  Jamestown, 
with  their  guns  trained  upon  the  approaching  enemy.  Behind 
them  were  several  land  batteries.  The  whole  made  an  im- 
posing appearance,  and  might  well  have  given  apprehension 
to  the  invaders. 

Fortunately,  however,  the  threatened  conflict  was  averted 
by  the  persuasion  of  the  Parliamentary  commissioners.  These 
men,  anxious  to  avoid  civil  war,  availed  themselves  of  the 
authority  given  them  by  the  Council  of  State,  to  offer  very- 
lenient  terms  of  surrender.  Some  of  them  seem  to  have  pre- 
ceded the  fleet  to  Virginia,  to  consult  with  their  friends  and 
to  formulate  plans  to  render  the  Governor's  resistance  ineffec- 
tual. It  is  not  improbable  that  these  efforts  were  seconded  by 
some  of  the  most  prominent  men  of  the  colony.  Two  members 
of  the  Council  itself,  it  is  said,  who  possessed  goods  of  great 
value  upon  vessels  in  the  fleet,  received  warning  that  their 
property  would  be  at  once  confiscated,  if  they  gave  their  sup- 
port to  the  Governor.  They  therefore  were  constrained  to 
advocate  submission.  With  division  in  the  ranks  of  the 
colonists  and  with  the  invaders  ready  for  action,  even  Ber- 
keley was  at  last  forced  to  give  way  and  consent  to  a 
capitulation. 

The  terms  of  surrender  were  drawn  up  at  Jamestown  and 
agreed  to  by  the  commissioners  on  the  one  hand,  and  by  the 
Governor,  Council  and  Burgesses  on  the  other.  It  was  agreed 
first,  that  Virginia  should  acknowledge  its  due  allegiance  to 
the  Commonwealth  of  England,  and  "to  the  lawes  there  es- 
tablished". This  submission,  it  was  declared,  was  "a  voluntary 
act,  not  forced  nor  constrained  by  a  conquest  upon  the  coun- 
try".*" It  was  also  stipulated  "that  the  people  of  Virginia  have 
i'Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  363. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  'GOM'afiON\a/E:Atir-B  ''idj^' 

free  trade  a§  the  people  of  England  do  enjoy  to  all  places  and 
with  all  nations  according  to  the  lawes  of  that  commonwealth". 
Even  more  interesting  was  the  agreement  "that  Virginia  shall 
be  free  from  all  taxes,  customs  and  impositions  whatsoever, 
and  none  to  be  imposed  on  them  without  consent  of  the  Grand 
Assembly,  and  soe  that  neither  fforts  nor  castles  bee  erected 
or  garrisons  maintained  without  their  consent".  When  these 
terms  of  surrender  were  reported  to  the  English  government. 
Parliament  thought  that  the  commissioners  had  been  too  liberal 
in  their  concessions,  and  some  of  the  articles  were  not  ratified. 

The  commissioners  granted  full  pardon  and  indemnity  for 
all  "acts,  words  or  writeings  done  or  spoken  against  the 
parliament"  and  any  persons  refusing  to  take  the  oath  of 
allegiance  to  the  new  government  were  given  "a  yeares 
time  ...  to  remove  themselves  and  their  estates  out  of  Vir- 
ginia". The  use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  per- 
mitted for  one  year  in  the  parishes  that  so  desired,  and  no 
ministers  were  deprived  of  their  charges  or  their  livings.^^ 

Separate  articles  were  drawn  up  between  the  commissioners 
and  the  Governor  and  Council.  Neither  Berkeley  nor  the 
Councillors  were  to  be  compelled,  during  the  ensuing  twelve 
months,  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance.  They  were  not  to  be 
censured  for  speaking  well  in  private  of  the  King.  They  were 
given  leave  to  sell  all  their  property  and  to  quit  the  country 
without  molestation.  They  were  permitted  to  send  a  message 
to  Charles  II,  giving  an  account  of  the  surrender.^^ 

The  commissioners  were  now  confronted  with  the  all-impor- 
tant task  of  establishing  a  new  government.  They  had  been 
given  power  by  the  Council  of  State  to  hold  an  election  of 
Burgesses  granting  the  franchise  to  all  who  had  taken  the 
oath  of  allegiance.  Feeling,  doubtless,  a  reluctance  to  assume 
the  entire  responsibility  of  moulding  a  new  constitution,  they 
resolved  to  wait  until  the  Burgesses  assembled  and  to  consult 
with  them  in  all  their  measures.  The  election  was  held  without 
delay,  and  the  members  were  sworn  in  on  April  26th,  1652. 

The  Burgesses  and  the  commissioners  then  entered  upon  a 
long  and  serious  debate  concerning  "the  settling  and  govern- 

^Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  363-365.  -^Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  365-367. 


loi'  </'  •  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

ing  of  Virginia". ^^  The  English  Council  had  not,  it  would 
seem,  given  specific  directions  in  regard  to  this  work,  so  the 
members  of  the  little  constitutional  convention  were  practically 
at  liberty  to  do  what  they  chose.  Realizing,  however,  that  all 
might  be  changed  if  it  proved  unsatisfactory  to  Parliament, 
they  proceeded  cautiously.  Their  chief  concern  was  to  estab- 
lish a  tentative  government  that  would  prevent  present  con- 
fusion and  could  later  be  perfected  by  the  Council  of  State. 
It  so  happened,  however,  that  the  English,  amid  the  confusion 
of  the  times,  neglected  to  attend  to  this  matter,  and  the  work  of 
the  convention  remained  essentially  unaltered  throughout  the 
Commonwealth  period. 

The  House  of  Burgesses,  since  it  had  been  officially  recog- 
nized by  the  Council  of  State,  was  made  the  chief  governing 
body  of  the  colony.  Except  for  the  veto  of  the  English  gov- 
ernment its  power  was  to  be  unlimited.  It  was  to  elect  the 
Governor  and  to  specify  his  duties.  If  his  administration 
proved  unsatisfactory  it  might  remove  him  from  office.  The 
Burgesses  were  also  to  elect  the  Council,  to  prescribe  its 
functions  and  limit  its  power.  This  proud  body,  which  had 
formerly  been  so  powerful,  was  now  to  exist  only  on  the  suf- 
frage of  the  House.  It  was  even  debated  whether  Councillors 
should  be  admitted  to  membership  in  the  General  Assembly. 
The  appointment  of  all  officials  was  also  to  "appertain  to  the 
Burgesses,  the  representatives  of  the  people",  but  it  was  agreed 
that  for  the  present  most  of  the  first  nominations  should  be 
left  to  the  Governor  and  the  commissioners.'** 

Thus  did  Virginia  become  in  all  but  name  a  republic.  In 
England,  the  long  cherished  hope  of  the  patriots  for  liberty 
was  to  be  disappointed  by  the  usurpation  of  Oliver  Cromwell, 
and  the  victory  of  Parliament  over  the  stubborn  Charles  was 
to  result  only  in  the  substitution  of  one  despot  for  another. 
But  the  commons  of  Virginia,  although  they  had  played  an 
insignificant  role  in  the  great  drama  of  the  times,  were  to  reap 
the  reward  which  was  denied  their  cousins  of  England.  Their 
government  for  the  next  eight  years  was  to  be  truly  represen- 
tative of  the  people.     Nor  did  the  English  government  often 

**  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  371.  **  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  371,  373. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH     103 

interfere  with  their  affairs.  Busy  with  his  numerous  wars  and 
with  the  cares  of  administration,  the  Protector  never  found 
time  to  acquaint  himself  thoroughly  with  what  was  happening 
in  Virginia.  In  1653,  and  again  in  1658,  Cromwell  promised 
to  make  some  definite  regulations  for  the  government  of  the 
colony,  but  he  was  interrupted  on  each  occasion  before  he 
could  put  his  resolutions  into  effect.  That  it  was  his  intention, 
however,  to  keep  the  appointment  of  the  Governor  in  his  own 
hands  seems  certain.  In  1654  the  Assembly  received  word 
that  his  Highness  had  decided  then  to  continue  Colonel  Ben- 
nett, of  whose  good  character  he  had  heard,  in  the  execution  of 
his  office,  until  he  could  further  signify  his  pleasure.  In  1657, 
the  Council  of  State  requested  Cromwell  to  appoint  some  person 
to  go  to  Virginia  as  its  Governor,  but  this  he  failed  to  do.^'^ 
With  the  exception  of  such  spasmodic  interruptions  as  these, 
and  the  partial  enforcement  of  the  Navigation  Acts,  the  colony 
was  left  almost  to  its  own  devices  throughout  the  Common- 
wealth period. 

By  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  commissioners  and  the  Bur- 
gesses Mr.  Richard  Bennett  was  made  Governor.  This  choice 
must  have  been  satisfactory  both  to  the  English  government 
and  the  Parliamentary  party  in  the  colony.  Mr,  Bennett  had 
been  one  of  the  few  prominent  Virginia  Puritans  and  had  left 
the  colony  during  the  persecution  of  dissenters  by  Sir  William 
Berkeley.  As  a  member  of  the  commission  he  had  been  instru- 
mental in  bringing  about  the  surrender  and  saving  the  colony 
from  civil  war.  It  was  agreed  that  he  should  serve  for  one 
year,  "or  untill  the  next  meeting  of  the  Assembly",  but  as 
his  administration  proved  most  satisfactory  he  was  continued 
in  office  by  Cromwell  until  March  31st,  1655.^^ 

The  new  government,  however,  was  not  to  be  established 
entirely  without  disorder  and  strife.  In  the  interval  between 
the  surrender  and  the  assembling  of  the  Burgesses  affairs  on 
the  Eastern  Shore  assumed  a  threatening  aspect.  The  people 
of  Northampton,  many  of  whom  seem  formerly  to  have  been 
favorable  to  the  Commonwealth,  became  ill  affected  to  the  new 

"Sp.  Dom.  Int.,  1-75;  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  510;  Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Vol.  II, 
p.  302. 
**Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  371,  408. 


104  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

regime,  even  before  it  was  well  begun.  A  number  of  things 
conspired  to  bring  about  this  change.  Among  the  inhabitants 
of  Northampton  were  a  number  of  Dutch  who  had  settled  there 
during  the  preceding  decade.  When  war  broke  out  between 
Holland  and  England  in  1652  it  was  rumored  that  these  people 
were  conspiring  with  the  Indians  to  bring  about  another 
massacre  in  Virginia.  Groundless  as  these  suspicions  were, 
they  infuriated  the  English  and  caused  grave  fears  for  the 
safety  of  the  Dutch  planters.  When  the  justices  of  the  peace 
took  precautions  to  protect  the  unfortunate  foreigners  their 
action  caused  discontent  and  bitterness  against  the  new  govern- 
ment. Moreover,  the  Navigation  Acts,  recently  passed  by 
Parliament,  restricting  foreign  trade  would,  if  enforced,  prove 
especially  damaging  to  the  people  of  the  Eastern  Shore.  Fi- 
nally, Northampton  had  not  been  represented  in  the  Assembly 
since  1647,  except  for  one  Burgess  in  1651,  and  the  belief 
had  sprung  up  that  the  county  was  to  become  independent  of 
the  government  at  Jamestown.  For  various  reasons,  therefore, 
Northampton  was  hostile  to  the  government.  And  when  the 
Parliamentary  commissioners  imposed  upon  them  a  tax  of 
forty-six  pounds  of  tobacco  per  jx)!!,  the  people  of  the  county 
voiced  their  anger  in  no  uncertain  terms,  and  selected  a  com- 
mittee of  six  to  draw  up  a  statement  of  their  grievances  and 
present  it  to  the  new  Assembly. 

"Wee,"  they  protested,  "the  Inhabitants  of  Northampton 
Countie  doe  complanye  that  from  tyme  to  tyme  wee  have  been 
submitted  &  bine  obedient  unto  the  paymt  of  publeq  taxacons. 
Butt  after  ye  yeare  1647,  since  yt  tyme  wee  Conceive  &  have 
found  that  ye  taxes  were  very  weightie.  But  in  a  more  es- 
petiall  manner  .  .  .  the  taxacon  of  fforty  sixe  pounds  of 
tobacco  p.  poll  (this  present  yeare).  And  desire  yt  ye  same  bee 
taken  off  ye  charge  of  ye  Countie;  furthermore  wee  alledge 
that  after  1647,  wee  did  understand  &  suppose  or  Countie  or 
Northampton  to  be  disioynted  &  sequestered  from  ye  rest  of 
Virginia.  Therefore  that  Llawe  wch  requireth  &  inioyneth 
Taxacons  from  us  to  bee  Arbitrarye  &  illegall;  fforasmuch 
as  wee  had  neither  summons  for  Ellecon  of  Burgesses  nor 
voyce  in  their  Assemblye  (during  the  time  aforesd)  but  only 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH     105 

the  Singular  Burgess  in  September,  Ano.,  1651.  Wee  con- 
ceive that  wee  may  LawfulHe  ptest  agt  the  pceedings  in  the  Act 
of  Assemblie  for  publiq  Taxacons  wch  have  relacon  to 
Northmton  Countie  since  ye  year  1647."^'^ 

Thus  early  in  the  history  of  the  colony  was  enunciated  the 
principle  that  taxation  without  representation  is  unjust  and 
illegal.  The  men  of  Northampton  do  not  speak  of  the  doctrine 
as  something  new,  but  as  a  thing  understood  and  recognized. 
Certain  it  is  that  the  people  of  Virginia,  in  all  periods  of  their 
colonial  history,  realized  the  vast  importance  of  confining  the 
power  of  taxation  to  their  own  Assembly. 

But  the  leaders  of  the  new  government  did  not  receive  the 
petition  with  favor.  They  were  willing  to  give  Northampton 
her  due  quota  of  Burgesses,  but  they  were  angered  at  the 
suggestion  of  separation.  Moreover,  the  disorders  on  the 
Eastern  Shore  became  more  pronounced  and  the  justices  were 
compelled  to  seek  aid  from  the  Council  in  protecting  the  Dutch. 
In  June,  1653,  the  turbulent  people  met  and,  amid  scenes  of 
disorder,  denounced  the  action  of  the  authorities.  When  a 
voice  from  the  crowd  cried  out  that  the  justices  were  a  "com- 
pany of  asses  and  villyanes",  the  j>eople  roared  out  their  appro- 
val. The  Assembly,  at  its  meeting  in  June,  1653,  was  forced  to 
take  active  steps  to  suppress  the  agitation  and  to  restore  order 
upon  the  i>eninsula.  Mr.  Bennett  with  several  members  of  the 
Assembly,  was  sent  to  Northampton,  "for  the  settlement  of  the 
peace  of  that  countie,  and  punishinge  delinquents".  In  this  he 
seems  to  have  been  entirely  successful,  for  we  hear  no  more 
of  disorders  upon  the  Eastern   Shore  during  this  period.** 

When  the  commissioners  and  the  Burgesses,  in  1652,  es- 
tablished anew  the  gubernatorial  office,  they  were  somewhat 
vague  in  defining  the  duties  belonging  to  it.  They  first  de- 
clared that  Mr.  Bennett  was  to  exercise  "all  the  just  powers 
and  authorities  that  may  belong  to  that  place  lawfully".*^  But 
that  it  was  not  their  intention  to  give  the  new  officer  the  pre- 
rogatives enjoyed  by  the  royal  Governor  is  shown  by  their 
further  statement  that  he  was  to  have  such  power  only  as  should 

"Wise,  p.  139.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  371. 

"Wise,  pp.  114,  115;  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  380. 


io6  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

be  granted  him  from  time  to  time  by  the  Assembly.^ ^  This 
lack  of  clearness  led,  quite  naturally,  to  several  clashes  between 
the  legislative  and  executive  branches  of  the  government. 

At  the  session  of  Assembly  of  July,  1653,  the  Burgesses 
showed  that  they  would  brook  no  interference  from  the  Gov- 
ernor with  their  affairs.  On  the  eve  of  the  election  of  the 
Speaker,  they  received  a  message  from  Mr.  Bennett  and  the 
Council  advising  them  not  to  choose  a  certain  Lieutenant- 
Colonel  Chiles.  Although  it  was  clearly  shown  that  this  gen- 
tleman could  not  serve  with  propriety,  the  Burgesses  gave 
him  the  election,  merely,  it  would  seem,  as  a  rebuke  to  the 
presumption  of  the  Governor.^ ^ 

Edward  Digges,  who  succeeded  Mr.  Bennett,  seems  to  have 
had  no  clash  with  the  Assembly,  but  during  the  next  adminis- 
tration, when  Samuel  Matthews  was  Governor,  the  executive 
made  a  determined  effort  to  break  the  power  of  the  Burgesses. 
At  the  session  of  1658,  the  Governor  and  the  Council  sent  a 
message  to  the  Assembly  declaring  that  body  dissolved.''^  This 
move  startled  the  Burgesses.  The  royal  Governors  had  always 
possessed  the  right  of  dissolving  the  House,  but  no  such  au- 
thority had  been  delegated  to  the  new  executive.  Moreover, 
it  was  inconsistent  with  the  theory,  upon  which  everyone  had 
acted  since  the  surrender  in  1652,  that  all  power  resided  in 
the  representatives  of  the  people.  ''The  said  disolution," 
replied  the  House,  "as  the  case  standeth  is  not  presidentall 
neither  legall  according  to  the  lawes,  now  in  force.  Therefore 
wee  humbly  desire  a  revocation  of  the  said  declaration."^* 

Although  the  Burgesses  replied  thus  courteously  they  were 
deeply  angered.  Rightly  judging  this  to  be  a  challenge  to 
their  power,  they  resolved  to  show  once  more  that  they  were 
supreme  in  the  government.  They  voted,  therefore,  to  ignore 
the  dissolution.  And  it  was  ordered  that  if  any  member  left 
his  seat  he  was  to  be  censured  "as  a  person  betraying  the  trust 
reposed  in  him  by  his  country". ^^  An  oath  of  secrecy  was 
administered  to  all  present,  while  the  Speaker  was  directed  to 

■^Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  372.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I, "pp.  yjT,  378. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  499.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  499. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  500. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH     107 

"sign  nothing  without  the  consent  of  the  major  part  of  the 
house". 

Staggered  by  the  determined  attitude  of  the  Burgesses,  the 
Governor  and  Council  at  once  showed  signs  of  weakening. 
They  were  willing,  they  said,  to  allow  the  Assembly  to  continue 
its  deliberations,  provided  the  work  were  brought  to  a  speedy 
conclusion.  The  "dispute  of  the  power  of  disolving  and  the 
legality  thereof"  they  wished  to  refer  to  the  Lord  Protector. 
But  the  House  resolved  unanimously  that  this  answer  was 
unsatisfactory.  The  withdrawal  of  the  dissolution  was  not 
enough,  the  Governor  and  Council  must  acknowledge  that  their 
act  was  illegal  and  therefore  had  never  taken  effect.  "The 
House,  unsatisfied  with  these  answers,  appointed  a  committee 
to  draw  up  a  report  for  the  manifestation  and  vindication  of  the 
Assembly's  power  which  after  presentation  to  the  House 
to  be  sent  to  the  Governour  and  Councell."^^  This  committee 
recommended  the  immediate  dismissal  of  the  Council,  and 
proposed  resolutions  declaring  the  "power  of  government  to 
reside  in  such  persons  as  shall  be  impowered  by  the  Burgesses 
(the  representatives  of  the  people)  who  are  not  dissolvable  by 
any  power  now  extant  in  Virginia,  but  the  House  of  Bur- 
gesses". Upon  receiving  this  report  the  House  proceeded  to 
annul  "all  former  election  of  Governour  and  Councill".  Since 
the  executive  had  presumed  to  abuse  its  authority  by  defying 
the  body  that  had  appointed  it  to  office,  it  must  be  removed  to 
evince  to  all  the  supremacy  of  the  House.  The  Burgesses  seem 
not  to  have  laid  the  blame  for  this  crisis  upon  the  Governor, 
but  upon  some  of  the  Councillors,  who  were  endeavoring  to 
make  their  own  power  supreme  in  the  government.  Colonel 
Matthews  was,  therefore,  reelected,  and  invested  with  "all 
just  rights  and  privileges  belonging  to  the  Governour  and 
Captain  Generall  of  Virginia".^® 

Fearing  that  the  Council  might  offer  resistance  to  their 
decrees,  the  Burgesses  commanded  the  serjeant-at-arms  of 
the  Assembly  and  the  sheriffs  of  James  City  county  not  to 
execute  any  warrant,  precept  or  command"  from  any  other 
person  than  the  Speaker  of  the  House.    The  Secretary  of  State, 

"Hen..  Vol.  I,  p.  501.  "Hen.,  Vol  I,  pp.  502,  503. 


io8  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Colonel  William  Claiborne,  was  directed  to  deliver  up  the 
public  records.  But  the  Governor  and  Council  seem  not  to 
have  thought  of  resistance,  and  submitted  to  the  recall  and  to 
a  new  election  by  the  Assembly.  Although  they  had  just 
resolved  that  "for  the  future  none  bee  admitted  a  councellor  but 
such  who  shall  be  nominated,  appointed  and  confirmed  by  the 
house",  the  Burgesses  now  allowed  the  Governor  to  propose 
to  them  a  list  of  names  for  the  new  Council.  It  would  seem 
that  Nathaniel  Bacon  and  Francis  Willis  were  regarded  as 
the  instigators  of  the  dissolution,  for  they  were  the  only  mem- 
bers of  the  Council  which  had  signed  the  offensive  order  who 
were  not  now  reelected.^'^ 

When  the  Assembly  met  again,  in  March,  1 659,  it  found  that 
its  supremacy  was  once  more  threatened,  A  letter  had  been 
received  from  Henry  Lawrence,  President  of  the  Council  of 
State  in  the  home  government,  which  seemed  to  imply  that  the 
Governor  and  his  Council  and  not  the  Burgesses,  were  to  hold 
the  chief  power  in  Virginia.  Lawrence  declared  that  the 
"looseness"  of  affairs  in  the  colony  had  induced  Cromwell  to 
take  active  steps  for  the  settlement  of  its  constitution,  but  that 
these  measures  had  been  brought  to  a  sudden  halt  by  the  Lord 
Protector's  death.  The  matter  was,  however,  still  before  the 
Council  of  State,  and  the  colony  might  soon  expect  some  defin- 
ite orders  from  its  deliberations.  In  the  meanwhile,  he  wrote, 
"their  Lordships  do  will  and  require  you  the  present  Governour 
and  Councill  there  to  apply  yourselves  ...  to  the  peaceable 
and  orderly  management  of  the  affairs  of  that  collony,  accord- 
ing to  such  good  lawes  and  customes  as  have  been  heretofore 
used  and  exercised  among  you".^^ 

The  Burgesses  were  deeply  agitated  by  this  letter.  They 
at  once  passed  resolutions  promising  to  obey  the  commands 
of  the  Council  of  State,  but  they  determined  to  write  the  new 
Lord  Protector,  Richard  Cromwell,  asking  that  the  privileges 
of  the  Burgesses  be  confirmed.  In  this  crisis  the  Governor 
gave  striking  evidence  of  his  liberal  inclinations  by  coming  be- 
fore the  House  to  promise  them  his  support.  "He  acknowl- 
edged the  supream  power  of  electing  officers  to  be  by  the 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  499,  505.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  510. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH     109 

present  lawes  resident  in  the  Grand  Assembly",  and  offered 
to  "joyne  his  best  assistance  with  the  countrey  in  makeing  an 
addresse  to  his  Highnesse  for  confirmation  of  their  present 
priviledges".^® 

In  the  meanwhile  an  act  was  prepared  making  some  impor- 
tant changes  in  the  constitution,  but  confirming  the  power  of 
the  Burgesses.  It  was  proposed,  first,  that  Colonel  Matthews 
"bee  the  Governour  and  Captain  Gennerall  of  Virginia  for  two 
yeares  ensueing,  and  then  the  Grand  Assembly  to  elect  a  Gov- 
ernour as  they  think  fitt,  the  person  elect  being  then  one  of  the 
Councell".  The  personnel  of  the  Council  was  to  remain  un- 
changed and  for  the  future  its  members  were  to  serve  for  life, 
"except  in  case  of  high  misdemanors".  Lastly  the  Governor 
was  to  have  the  privilege  of  nominating  the  Councillors,  but 
the  Burgesses  could  confirm  or  reject  at  their  discretion.^" 
The  Council  at  first  assented  to  these  proposals,  "till  the  pleas- 
ure of  his  Highness  be  further  signified",  but  later,  it  seems, 
they  "expressly  declined  the  said  act",  and  declared  the  Assem- 
bly dissolved. ^^  Whether  or  not  the  Burgesses  submitted  to 
this  dissolution  and  left  the  Governor  and  Council  to  govern 
the  colony  as  they  chose,  does  not  appear.  It  is  quite  probable 
that  the  executive,  in  the  interval  between  the  sessions  of 
Assembly  of  March  1659  and  March  1660,  based  its  right  to 
rule,  not  upon  the  commission  of  the  Burgesses,  but  upon  the 
authority  given  it  in  Lawrence's  letter. 

In  May,  1659,  Richard  Cromwell  resigned  the  reigns  of  gov- 
ernment, and  England  was  left  a  prey  to  confusion  and 
uncertainty.  The  Virginians  did  not  know  to  what  govern- 
ment to  give  their  allegiance.  None  could  tell  whether  military 
despotism  would  be  established  in  England,  or  another  Crom- 
well would  arise,  or  the  House  of  Stuart  be  restored.  To  add 
to  their  troubles,  in  January,  1660,  Colonel  Matthews  died, 
leaving  them  without  a  Governor.  March  13th,  the  Assembly 
convened. 

The  Burgesses  at  once  took  steps  to  reestablish  their  ques- 
tioned   prerogatives.      An    act    was    passed    declaring    that 

"•Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  512.  "Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  517. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  537. 


no  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

"whereas  by  reason  of  the  late  frequent  distractions  there  being 
in  England  noe  resident  absolute  and  gen'll  confessed  power"; 
Be  it  enacted  and  confirmed,  That  the  supreame  power  of  the 
government  of  this  country  should  be  resident  in  the  Assembly, 
And  that  all  writts  issue  in  the  name  of  the  Grand  Assembly 
of  Virginia,  until  such  a  comand  and  comission  come  out  of 
England  as  shall  be  by  the  Assembly  adjudged  lawfull".^^ 

Their  next  care  was  to  elect  a  new  Governor.  Strangely 
enough  their  choice  fell  upon  that  staunch  advocate  of  royalty, 
Sir  William  Berkeley.  When  the  surrender  had  been  made  to 
the  parliamentary  commissioners  in  1652,  the  Governor  had 
secured  for  himself  the  right  to  quit  the  colony  any  time  within 
the  ensuing  year.  But  circumstances  had  prevented  his 
sailing  during  this  period,  and  later  he  resolved  to  remain  in 
Virginia.  During  the  eight  years  of  the  Commonwealth  period 
he  had  lived  in  retirement,  obedient  to  the  new  government, 
but  longing  for  the  restoration  of  the  Stuarts.  Why  he 
was  now  called  forth  by  the  Assembly  to  take  once  more  the 
most  important  office  in  Virginia,  cannot  be  certainly  deter- 
mined. It  seems  strange  that  the  Burgesses  in  one  act  should 
assert  their  own  sovereignty  in  the  most  emphatic  terms,  and 
in  the  next  elect  as  their  Governor  this  ardent  servant  of  the 
Crown.  If  it  had  been  their  only  aim  to  choose  a  leader  of 
executive  ability,  they  did  not  lack  men  of  power  and  exper- 
ience whose  love  of  popular  government  was  unquestioned. 
Berkeley  had  in  his  first  administration  ruled  justly  and  well, 
but  there  is  no  reason  to  think  that  Virginia  had  been  more 
prosperous  and  happy  under  him  than  under  the  Common- 
wealth Governors.  It  seems  then  most  probable  that  the 
Assembly  was  actuated  in  its  choice  by  an  apprehension  that 
the  monarchy  might  be  restored.  If  the  English  should  invite 
Charles  to  reclaim  his  lost  inheritance,  it  would  be  of  much 
advantage  to  the  colony  to  have  at  its  head  the  former  royal 
Governor.  It  would  make  the  restoration  in  Virginia  easy 
and  peaceful,  for  the  staunchest  republican  would  not  dare 
resist,  with  Charles  II  on  his  throne  and  Sir  William  Ber- 
keley ruling  at  Jamestown.     Moreover,   it  could  but  please 

"Hen..  Vol.  I,  p.  530. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH     in 

the  King  and  recommend  the  colony  to  his  favor.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Assembly  was  careful  to  reserve  all  real  au- 
thority to  itself.  Sir  William  was  to  be'  its  servant,  not  its 
master.  If,  out  of  the  confusion  in  England,  should  emerge 
a  real  republic,  they  could  force  the  Governor  either  to  ac- 
knowledge the  new  power  or  to  resign  his  commission.  In 
fact  the  office  was  at  first  proffered  him  only  upon  condition 
that  he  would  submit  to  any  power,  whatever  it  might  be,  that 
succeeded  in  fixing  itself  over  the  English  people.*'^ 

But  to  this  requirement  Berkeley  would  by  no  means  con- 
sent. He  was  willing,  during  the  present  interregnum,  to 
hold  office  from  the  people  of  Virginia,  but  never  from  any 
English  power  save  that  of  the  Crown.  In  an  address  to 
the  Assembly,  outlining  his  conduct  during  the  troubles  of 
the  past  eleven  years,  he  made  it  quite  clear  that  his  sympa- 
thies had  undergone  no  change.  "When  I  came  first  into  this 
Countrie,"  he  said,  "I  had  the  Commicon  and  Commands  of 
my  most  gracious  master  King  Charles  of  ever  blessed 
memory.  ,  .  .  When  God's  wrath  lay  heavie  upon  us  for 
the  sins  of  our  nation,  my  ever  honoured  Master  was  put  to 
a  violent  death,  and  immeadiately  after  his  Royall  Sonne  .  .  . 
sent  me  a  Commicon  to  governe  here  under  him.  .  .  .  But 
the  Parliament,  after  the  defeat  at  Worcester,  (by  the  insti- 
gation of  some  other  intent)  sent  a  small  power  to  force  my 
submission  to  them,  which  finding  me  defenceless,  was 
quietly  (God  pardon  me)  effected.  But  this  parliament  con- 
tinued not  long  after  this,  but  another  supream  power  outed 
them,  whoe  remained  not  long  neither,  nor  his  sonne  after 
him.  .  .  .  And  now  my  intelligence  is  not  enough  to  tell  me 
what  incorporate,  mixt,  or  individuall  power  there  is.  .  .  . 
Under  all  these  mutable  governments  of  divers  natures  and 
constitutions,  I  have  lived  most  resigningly  submissive :  But, 
Mr.  Speaker,  it  is  one  duty  to  live  obedient  to  a  government, 
and  another  of  a  very  different  nature  to  Command  under 
it.  .  .  .  You  have,  Mr.  Speaker,  with  great  wisdome  and 
providence  taken  care  of  my  obedient  prostrating  to  the 
Supreame  power  the  authoritie  you  would  entrust  me  with, 

**  Southern  Lit.  Mess.,  Jan.  1845. 


112  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

for  which  I  give  you  my  humble  thanks;  for  this  wisdome  of 
yours  hath  animated  my  caution  of  assumeing  this  burden, 
which  is  so  volatile,  slippery  and  heavy,  that  I  may  justly  feare 
it  will  breake  my  Limbs."  It  might  be  thought  by  some,  he 
said,  that  the  emergency  would  excuse  his  accepting  this 
authority,  but  the  King  would  judge  him,  and  if  his  informa- 
tion were  prejudiced,  his  punishment  might  be  severe.  He  did 
not  fear  death,  he  was  too  old  for  that,  but  an  imprudent, 
criminal  death  he  abhorred.  In  conclusion  he  declared  that 
these  and  other  considerations  must  dissuade  him  from 
accepting  the  proffered  office. 

But  the  Assembly  persisted  in  its  determination  to  make 
him  Governor.  If  he  scrupled  to  promise  to  serve  under  the 
enemies  of  the  Crown,  that  promise  would  not  be  required 
of  him.  Let  him  be  Governor  of  Virginia,  by  their  authority 
only,  and  only  so  long  as  the  confusion  in  England  continued. 
If  a  new  Protector,  or  a  new  Commonwealth  gained  the 
ascendency,  and  demanded  Virginia's  submission,  he  might 
resign.  If  England  returned  to  its  obedience  to  the  Throne, 
he  could  petition  the  King  for  a  new  commission.  To  this 
Berkeley  assented.  "Wee  have  all,"  he  said,  in  another  short 
address,  "had  great  and  pressing  feares  of  offending  a  Su- 
preame  power  which  neither  by  present  possession  is  soe,  nor 
has  a  publiquely  confessed  politique  capacity  to  be  a  Supream 
power.  I  alsoe,  Mr.  Speaker,  have  my  pressing  feares  too,  and 
I  am  seriously  afraid  to  offend  him,  who  by  all  Englishmen  is 
confessed  to  be  in  a  naturall  politique  capacity  of  being  a 
Supreame  power."  He  therefore,  he  said,  made  this  declara- 
tion in  the  presence  of  God,  that  if  any  government  became 
fixed  in  London,  he  would  immediately  lay  down  his  commis- 
sion. When  this  was  recorded  and  they  were  still  of  the  same 
mind,  he  was  ready  most  thankfully  to  serve  them.®* 

Thus  did  Sir  William  Berkeley  a  second  time  become  Gov- 
ernor of  Virginia.  It  must  have  been  with  trepidation  that 
this  man,  who  had  so  often  denied  the  right  of  any  officer  to 
serve  save  by  the  King's  commands,  accepted  now  this  com- 
mission from  the  hands  of  the  people.  The  stern  hater  of 
•*  Southern  Lit.  Mess.,  Jan.  1845. 


GOVERNOR  BERKELEY  AND  THE  COMMONWEALTH     113 

republicanism  was  becoming  the  head  of  an  independent  Httle 
repubHc.  For  such  Virginia  was  and  must  continue  to  be  until 
there  should  appear  in  England  some  fixed  government  to 
which  it  could  submit  "I  am,"  Berkeley  wrote  Governor 
Stuyvesant  of  New  Amsterdam,  "but  a  servant  of  the  assem- 
bly's; neither  do  they  arrogate  any  power  to  themselves,  fur- 
ther than  the  miserable  distractions  of  England  force  them 
to.  For  when  God  shall  be  pleased  in  his  mercy  to  take  away 
and  dissipate  the  unnatural  diversions  of  their  native  country, 
they  will  immediately  return  to  their  own  professed 
obedience."®^ 

The  restoration  of  the  monarchy  took  place  May  29th, 
1660.  When  the  news  reached  Virginia  some  weeks  later,  the 
people  accepted  the  change  without  opposition,  and  probably 
with  relief,  for  they  were  weary  of  uncertainty  and  confu- 
sion, Berkeley's  unaffected  joy  was  mingled  with  a  deep 
apprehension  that  the  King  might  be  angered  at  his  accept- 
ing office  without  his  consent.  But  Charles  was  not  so  un- 
mindful of  his  staunch  support  at  a  time  when  the  fortunes 
of  the  monarchy  were  at  their  lowest  ebb  as  to  reproach  him 
for  this  act,  which  might,  and  probably  did,  redound  to  his 
advantage.  He  ?oon  relieved  the  Governor's  fears  by  sending 
a  new  commission.  In  a  passion  of  joy  and  gratitude  Ber- 
keley wrote  his  thanks.  "I  .  .  .  doe  most  humbly  throwe 
myselfe  at  your  Ma'ties  feet,"  he  said,  "in  a  dutifull  thank- 
fullness  to  your  Majestie,  that  you  yett  think  me  worthy 
of  your  Royall  Commands.  It  is  true,  ...  I  did  something, 
which  if  misrepresented  to  your  Majestie,  may  cause  your 
Majestie  to  think  me  guilty  of  a  weakness  I  should  ever  abhor 
myself  for.  But  it  was  noe  more  .  ,  .  than  to  leape  over  the 
fold  to  save  your  Majesties  flock,  when  your  Majesties 
enemies  of  that  fold  had  barred  up  the  lawfull  entrance  into 
it,  and  enclosed  the  Wolves  of  Scisme  and  rebellion  ready  to 
devour  all  within  it.  Nor  did  I  adventure  on  this,  without 
the  advice  and  impulsion  of  your  Majesties  best  Subjects  in 
these  parts.  ...  I  always  in  all  conditions  had  more  fear 
of  your  Majesties  ffrownes  than  the  Swords  or  Tortures  of 
your  Enemies."®* 

•*  Campbell,  p.  74.  **  Southern  Lit.  Mess.,  Jan.,  1845. 


114  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

And  so  the  Commonwealth  period  in  Virginia  came  to  an 
end.  The  colony  had  benefited  greatly  by  the  eight  years 
of  semi-independence  and  self-government.  The  population 
had  increased  rapidly.  In  1649,  there  had  been  about 
15,000  people  in  Virginia,  while  six  years  after  the  Restora- 
tion, the  Governor  estimated  their  number  at  40,000.  This 
great  gain  was  due  chiefly  to  accelerated  immigration  from 
England.  The  overthrow  and  execution  of  the  King  had  sent 
many  of  his  followers  to  seek  shelter  with  Sir  William  Ber- 
keley, others  had  come  to  escape  the  confusion  and  horrors 
of  civil  war,  while  the  numerous  prisoners  taken  in  battle 
had  furnished  abundant  material  for  the  never-ending  stream 
of  indentured  servants.  Gentleman  and  tradesman  and  laborer 
alike  were  welcome,  for  land  was  abundant  and  the  colony's 
only  need  was  men.  Nor  was  prosperity  yet  strangled  by 
the  strict  enforcement  of  the  Navigation  Acts.  Dutch  ves- 
sels continued  to  sail  through  the  capes  in  defiance  of  England 
and  to  carry  off  the  planters'  tobacco.  Not  until  the  closing 
years  of  the  Commonwealth  period  did  the  increasing  freight 
rates  and  the  decreasing  price  of  tobacco  indicate  that  the 
"Hollanders"  were  being  more  strictly  excluded."^ 

Equally  important  was  the  training  received  by  the  people 
in  self-government.  For  eight  years  they  had  been  their  own 
masters,  enacting  such  laws  as  they  chose,  and  free  from  the 
restraining  hand  of  the  King.  There  had  been  no  royal  Gov- 
ernor to  veto  their  bills,  or  threaten  the  Burgesses,  or  intimi- 
date the  voters,  or  overawe  the  Council,  or  sway  the  courts 
of  justice.  And  the  experience  was  priceless.  It  schooled 
them  in  governmental  affairs  and  taught  them  self-reliance, 
patience  and  stubbornness  to  oppose  oppression.  Having 
tasted  the  sweets  of  freedom,  they  were  ill  prepared  ever 
again  to  tolerate  injustice  and  misgovernment.  If  there  had 
been  no  Commonwealth  period  in  Virginia,  possibly  there  had 
never  been  a  Bacon's  Rebellion. 

"  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  357-360. 


CHAPTER  V 

The  Causes  of  Bacon's  Rebellion 

There  were  many  who  hailed  the  restoration  of  the  mon- 
archy as  the  dawn  of  an  era  of  prosperity  and  happiness  for 
Virginia.  The  colony,  despite  the  efforts  of  some  of  its 
people,  had  remained  loyal  to  the  Crown  until  overpowered 
by  force  of  arms.  It  might  well  expect  especial  favor  and 
care  from  its  prince,  now  that  he  was  firmly  established  upon 
his  throne.^  Of  the  ability  and  justice  of  the  Governor 
Virginia  had  had  ample  experience  during  the  ten  years  of  his 
first  administration. 

Never  was  a  people  doomed  to  more  bitter  disappointment. 
The  years  which  followed  the  Restoration  were  crowded  with 
misfortunes  greater  than  any  that  had  befallen  the  colony 
since  the  ghastly  days  of  the  Great  Sickness.  Charles  II, 
far  from  showing  gratitude  to  his  Old  Dominion,  overwhelmed 
it  with  injustice  and  oppression.  The  Virginians  were  crushed 
with  tremendous  duties  on  their  tobacco  and  with  ruinous 
restrictions  upon  their  trade.  The  titles  to  their  plantations 
were  threatened  by  a  grant  of  the  entire  colony  to  two  un- 
worthy favorites  of  the  King.  Governor  Berkeley,  embit- 
tered by  the  humiliation  of  the  Commonwealth  period,  and 
growing  avaricious  and  crabbed  with  advancing  years,  soon 
forfeited  that  respect  and  love  which  his  former  good  con- 
duct had  gained  him.  His  second  administration  was  marred 
by  partiality,  oppression  and  inefficiency.  The  people  were 
deprived  of  their  right  of  suffrage  by  continued  prorogation 
of  the  Assembly.  Local  government  fell  into  the  hands  of 
small  aristocratic  cliques,  while  the  poor  were  ground  down 
with  unequal  and  excessive  taxes.  Two  wars  with  Holland 
added  to  the  misfortunes  of  the  colonists.  Even  the  Heavens 
seemed  to  join  with  their  enemies,  for  the  country  was  visited 
*P.  R.  O.,  COi-34-95. 

"S 


ii6  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

by  a  terrific  hurricane  which  swept  over  the  plantations,  de- 
stroying crops  and  wrecking  houses.  These  accumulated 
misfortunes  brought  such  deep  suffering  upon  the  colony 
that  hundreds  of  families  were  reduced  to  poverty  and  many 
were  forced  into  debt  and  ruin.  No  wonder  that  the  commons, 
finally  driven  to  desperation,  should  have  risen  in  insurrection 
against  the  Governor  and  the  King. 

First  among  the  causes  of  distress  during  this  unhappy 
period  must  be  placed  the  Navigation  Acts.  England,  in  the 
middle  of  the  17th  century,  was  engaged  in  an  unsuccessful 
contest  with  Holland  for  the  carrying  trade  of  the  world.  The 
merchantmen  of  Amsterdam  and  Flushing  found  their  way 
even  to  Maryland  and  Virginia,  where  their  low  freight  rates 
and  the  liberal  prices  they  gave  for  tobacco,  assured  them  a 
hearty  welcome.  The  exports  of  the  colonies  to  England 
itself  were  not  infrequently  carried  in  Dutch  bottoms.  This 
was  a  source  of  much  anxiety  and  annoyance  to  the  British 
government.  It  seemed  unjust  that  the  American  colonies, 
which  had  been  founded  at  such  tremendous  cost,  should  now 
prove  as  great  a  source  of  wealth  to  Holland  as  to  the  mother 
country.  And  it  could  not  but  anger  the  English  shippers 
to  find  themselves  elbowed  by  these  foreigners  in  the  ports  of 
the  Bermudas  or  the  rivers  of  Virginia. 

In  1 65 1,  the  British  Parliament,  thinking  it  necessary  to 
give  their  merchants  some  protection  from  this  lively  compe- 
tition, passed  the  first  of  the  Navigation  Acts.  Under  its 
provisions  no  goods  of  the  growth  or  manufacture  of  Asia, 
America  or  Africa  should  be  introduced  into  England  in  any 
but  English  ships,  of  which  the  owner,  master  and  three- 
fourths  of  the  sailors  were  English  subjects;  and  all  foreign 
commodities  imported  to  England  should  be  conveyed  directly 
thither  from  the  place  of  growth  or  manufacture.^  This 
law  injured  the  Virginians  by  excluding  the  Dutch  carriers 
from  the  tobacco  trade  with  England  and  thus  causing  a  sharp 
rise  in  freight  rates.  During  the  early  years  of  the  Common- 
wealth period  it  was  frequently  avoided,  but  before  1660  the 
English  government  began  to  enforce  it  more  strictly. 

'Scobell,  Vol.  II,  p.  132. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  117 

Nor  did  the  people  get  relief  with  the  restoration  of  the 
monarchy.  Charles  II  proved  more  solicitous  that  Par- 
liament for  the  welfare  of  the  Eng-lish  merchants;  even 
more  indifferent  to  the  complaints  of  the  colonists.  A  new 
Navigation  Act  was  passed  in  1660  which  struck  a  deadly 
blow  at  the  prosperity  of  Virginia.  Under  its  provisions 
all  goods  sent  to  the  colonies,  even  though  of  foreign  growth 
or  manufacture,  were  to  be  exported  from  England,  and  all 
tobacco,  sugar,  wool,  etc.,  produced  in  the  colonies,  must  be 
shipped  only  to  England  or  to  her  dominions.^ 

Thus  were  the  colonies  sacrificed  upon  the  altar  of  greed. 
The  new  act  injured  the  Virginia  planters  in  several  ways. 
Since  all  their  tobacco  must  now  be  brought  to  English  ports, 
they  could  no  longer  seek  the  most  advantageous  markets. 
Had  the  demand  for  the  commodity  in  England  been  more 
elastic,  the  consequences  of  this  provision  might  not  have 
been  disastrous.  Declining  prices  would  have  so  stimulated 
the  demand  that  the  English  could  have  consumed  the  entire 
crop.  But  the  King's  customs  kept  up  the  price  to  the  con- 
sumer, and  made  it  impossible  for  the  merchants  to  dispose 
of  the  vast  quantities  of  the  leaf  that  had  formerly  gone  to 
Holland  and  other  countries."*  Moreover,  the  varieties  sold  to 
the  Dutch  were  not  popular  in  England,  and  could  not  be 
disposed  of  at  any  price.  Soon  the  market  became  so  glutted 
that  the  merchants  refused  to  take  more  than  half  the  crop, 
leaving  the  remainder  to  rot  upon  the  hands  of  the  planters. 

There  followed  in  Virginia  a  sharp  decline  in  prices.  The 
Dutch  had  given  the  colonists  three  pence  a  pound  for  their 
tobacco.^  A  few  years  after  the  Restoration  the  planters 
considered  themselves  fortunate  if  they  could  dispose  of  their 
crops  at  a  half  penny  a  pound.  Much  was  sold  at  a  farthing.® 
Now  since  tobacco  was  the  staple  product  of  Virginia  and  the 
main  support  of  the  people,  this  rapid  decline  in  its  value  was 
disastrous.     Frequent  complaints  were  sent  to  England  that 

*  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  357. 

*  Governor  Berkeley  wrote  in   1666  that  the  King's  customs   from  the 
Virginia  and  Maryland  tobacco  would  amount  "unto  about  £100,000". 

'  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  354.        "  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21. 


Ii8  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

the  colonists  could  not  maintain  themselves  and  their  families 
upon  the  meagre  returns  from  their  tobacco.  "Twelve  hun- 
dred pounds  is  the  medium  of  men's  yearly  crops,"  wrote 
Secretary  Ludwell  in  1667,  "and  a  half  penny  per  pound  is 
certainly  the  full  medium  of  the  price  given  for  it."  This 
made  an  average  income  for  each  planter  of  but  fifty  shil- 
lings. When  the  poor  man  had  paid  his  taxes  for  the  neces- 
sary support  of  the  government,  very  little  remained  to  him 
to  clothe  his  wife  and  children.  "So  much  too  little,"  he  adds, 
"that  I  can  attribute  it  to  nothing  but  the  mercy  of  God.  that 
he  has  not  fallen  into  mutiny  and  confusion."'^  In  1673  the 
Governor  and  the  Council  declared  that  the  colony  was  full 
of  indigent  persons,  who  could  barely  support  themselves 
with  their  utmost  exertions.^ 

Not  only  did  the  act  of  1660  depress  the  price  of  tobacco, 
but  it  increased  the  already  excessive  freight  rates.  Since 
the  bulk  of  the  colonial  exports  had  now  to  be  brought  di- 
rectly to  England,  in  English  ships,  the  masters  of  Plymouth 
or  London  could  double  or  triple  their  charges.  Simultan- 
eously there  occurred  a  pronounced  rise  in  the  cost  of  manu- 
factured goods.  The  far-famed  skill  of  the  Dutch  workmen 
had  made  it  possible  for  them  to  produce  many  articles  more 
cheaply  than  the  English,  and  to  underbid  them  in  their  own 
colonies.  But  now  that  all  foreign  goods  were  excluded,  the 
planters  were  forced  to  purchase  the  more  expensive  product 
of  the  English  workshops. 

Thus  were  the  Virginians  cut  with  a  two-edged  sword.  At 
the  very  time  that  their  incomes  were  being  diminished,  they 
were  confronted  by  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  living.  Nor 
could  they,  as  Lord  Baltimore  declared  they  might,  alleviate 
these  evils  by  industry  and  thrift.  For  the  more  strenuous 
were  their  efforts  to  increase  the  tobacco  crop,  the  greater 
would  be  the  glut  in  the  English  market  and  the  more  disas- 
trous the  drop  in  prices. 

The  poor  colonists  found  an  able,  but  an  unsuccessful  ad- 

'  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21. 

•  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-51.    Compare  Petition  of  Governor  Berkeley,  Aug.  22, 
1662,  CO1-16. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  iic> 

vQcate,  in  a  London  merchant  named  John  Bland.  "If  the 
Hollanders,"  he  wrote  in  a  paper  addressed  to  the  King, 
"must  not  trade  to  Virginia  how  shall  the  Planters  dispose 
of  their  Tobacco?  The  English_wilX_no.t  buy  it,  for  what 
the  Hollander  carried  thence  was  a  sort  of  Tobacco,  not 
desired  by  any  other  people,  .  .  .  the  Tobacco  will  not  vend 
in  England,  the  Hollanders  will  not  fetch  it  from  England; 
what  must  become  thereof?"  But  Charles  11,  who  knew  little 
of  economic  matters,  and  cared  nothing  for  the  welfare  of 
the  colonists,  ignored  Bland's  convincing  appeal.  No  alle- 
viation was  given  Virginia,  and  she  was  allowed  to  drift  on 
through  poverty  and  desperation  to  rebellion. 

In  a  vain  attempt  to  make  the  colony  independent  of  the 
English  manufacturers  and  to  turn  the  people  from  the 
excessive  planting  of  tobacco,  the  Assembly  passed  a  series  of 
acts  designed  to  encourage  local  industrial  establishments. 
It  was  especially  desired  that  Virginia  should  make  her  own 
cloth,  for  the  cost  of  the  English  fabrics  was  excessive.^  To 
stimulate  the  art  of  spinning  and  weaving  the  Assembly 
offered  rewards  for  the  best  pieces  of  linen  and  woollen  goods 
produced  in  the  country.  A  bounty  was  placed  on  the  manu- 
facture of  silk.^"  In  1666,  the  establishment  of  cloth  works 
in  each  county  was  made  compulsory  by  act  of  Assembly." 
"Whereas,"  it  was  declared,  "the  present  obstruction  of  trade 
and  the  nakedness  of  the  country  doe  suffitiently  evidence  the 
necessity  of  provideing  supply  of  our  wants  by  improveing 
all  meanes  of  raysing  and  promoteing  manufactures  amonge 
ourselvels,  ...  Be  it  enacted  .  .  .  that  wiithin  two  yeares 
at  furthest  .  .  .  the  commissioners  of  each  county  court  shall 
provide  and  sett  up  a  loome  and  weaver  in  each  of  the  respec- 
tive counties."^^  Nor  were  other  industries  neglected.  Tan- 
houses  were  erected  in  various  places  "to  tanne,  curry  and 
make  the  hides  of  the  country  into  leather  and  shoes". ^^ 
Bounties  were  offered  for  the  construction  of  vessels,  in  the 

'Hen.,  Vol.  H,  pp.  120,  121. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-19;  Hen.,  Vol.  H,  p.  272. 

"  Hen.,  Vol.  H,  p.  238. 

"Ibid.  " Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  123. 


I20  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

hope  that  Virginia  might  rival  the  prosperous  ship-builders 
of  New  England. ^"^ 

These  experiments  added  a  heavy  burden  to  the  poor  tax- 
payer, while  they  accomplished  little  for  the  relief  of  the 
colony.  Virginia,  with  its  scattered  plantations  and  its  lack 
of  skilled  artisans,  could  not  hope  to  compete  with  the  work- 
shops of  England.  The  commissioners,  whether  from  corrup- 
tion or  from  lack  of  ability,  proved  poor  business  managers, 
and  their  ill  success  occasioned  loud  and  bitter  complaints. 

In  May,  1661,  Governor  Berkeley  sailed  for  England  to 
combat  a  new  design  to  revive  the  Virginia  Company.  It  is 
quite  probable  that  he  took  occasion  during  his  stay  at  court 
to  protest  against  the  Navigation  Acts.^^  But  he  found  it 
impossible  to  turn  the  King  and  Parliament  from  what  had 
become  their  settled  colonial  policy.  Ten  years  later,  when 
the  Lords  of  Trade  and  Plantations  asked  him  what  impedi- 
ments there  were  to  the  improvement  of  trade  in  the  colony, 
the  Governor  blurted  out  the  truth  with  his  accustomed  vigor. 
"Mighty  and  destructive  by  that  severe  act  of  Parliament 
which  excludes  us  from  haveing  any  Commerce  with  any 
Nacon  in  Europe  but  our  owne,  Soe  that  wee  cannot  add  to 
our  plantacon  any  Comodity  that  growes  out  of  itt  .  .  .  ffor 
it  is  not  lawfull  for  us  to  carry  a  pipe-staff  or  a  Bushel  of 
Corne  to  any  place  in  Europe  out  of  the  King's  dominions. 
If  this  were  for  his  Majesty's  Service  or  the  good  of  his 
Subjects  wee  should  not  repine  what  ever  our  Sufferings 
are  for  it.    But  on  my  Soule  it  is  the  Contrary  for  both."^® 

In  seeking  relief  from  the  evil  consequences  of  the  Navi- 
gation Acts  the  Virginians  turned  to  their  cousins  of  New 
England. ^''^  And  the  hardy  sailors  of  Massachusetts  and  Con- 
necticut, tempted  by  the  high  prices  of  manufactured  goods 
in  the  southern  colonies,  brought  their  wares  into  the  James, 
the  York  and  the  Potomac,  where  they  entered  into  lively  com- 
petition with  the  English  merchants.     Nor  did  they  hesitate^ 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-19;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  178. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-16;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  17. 
"P.  R.  O.,  COi-26-77;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  315. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -24. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  121 

when  occasion  offered,  to  defy  the  law  by  transporting  the 
Virginia  tobacco  to  foreign  markets. ^^  But  England  was  un- 
willing to  leave  the  colonists  even  this  small  loophole.  Parlia- 
jment  decided,  in  1672,  to  place  a  duty  of  one  penny  a  pound 
upon  tobacco  shipped  from  one  colony  to  another,  and  the  pay- 
ment of  this  duty  did  not  give  liberty  to  the  owners  to  trans- 
port it  to  a  foreign  country.  This  act  completely  crippled  the 
intercolonial  trade.  A  few  years  later,  after  Bacon's  Re- 
bellion, when  the  Virginia  counties  were  presenting  their 
grievances  to  the  King's  commissioners,  the  people  of  Lower 
Norfolk  requested  that  the  act  of  1672  might  be  repealed. 
The  only  notice  taken  of  their  petition  was  the  contemptuous 
comment  of  the  commissioners  that  it  was  wholly  mutinous 
for  them  "to  desire  a  thing  contrary  to  his  Majesty's  Royall 
pleasure  &  benefitt  and  also  against  an  Act  of  Parliament".  ^^ 

It  had  been  suggested,  when  the  price  of  tobacco  began  to 
fall,  that  the  evil  might  be  remedied  by  governmental  restraint 
upon  the  annual  crop.  The  diminution  of  the  demand  for  the 
leaf,  brought  about  by  the  loss  of  the  foreign  market,  was  to 
be  met  by  a  corresponding  limitation  upon  the  supply.  Prices 
would  thus  be  restored  and  the  planter  would  receive  a  greater 
return  for  a  much  smaller  output.  But  for  this  remedy  to 
be  effective,  it  would  be  necessary  to  secure  the  cooperation 
of  Maryland  and  perhaps  North  Carolina,  as  a  cessation  in 
Virginia  would  accomplish  little,  if  no  restraint  were  put 
upon  the  planters  of  the  other  colonies.  Moreover,  since  the 
proposed  step  might  diminish  the  revenue  from  the  customs, 
it  would  be  necessary  to  obtain  the  consent  of  the  King. 

In  1662  many  of  the  planters  and  merchants  petitioned 
Charles  II  to  forbid  the  planting  of  tobacco  in  Maryland  and 
Virginia  for  one  year,^*^  At  first  this  appeal  was  rejected 
and  the  colonists  were  commanded  to  refrain  from  present- 
ing similar  petitions  in  the  future.  Later,  however,  the  Privy 
Council  secured  a  reversal  of  this  decision  and  an  order  was 
issued  authorizing  the  Assembly  to  appoint  commissioners  to 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-30;  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  357. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-328;  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  HI,  p.  38. 
="  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  389. 


122  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

confer  with  the  Marylanders  upon  the  best  means  of  lessen- 
ing the  excessive  crops.^^  Accordingly  a  meeting  was  held  at 
Wicoocomico,  May  12,  1664,  which  recommended  that  the 
planting  of  tobacco  after  the  twentieth  of  June  each  year 
should  be  prohibited.  The  report  met  with  the  approval  of 
the  Virginians  and  was  promptly  ratified  by  the  Assembly, 
but  the  Marylanders  believed  that  a  partial  cessation  would 
be  detrimental  to  their  interests  and  their  legislature  refused 
to  give  its  consent. 

But  as  prices  sank  lower  and  lower,  and  poverty  be- 
came more  general,  the  Virginians  once  more  appealed 
to  Maryland,  this  time  for  a  total  cessation  for  one  year. 
Numerous  letters  were  exchanged  upon  the  subject,  but  at 
first  nothing  was  accomplished.  After  many  months  had  been 
consumed  in  useless  negotiations  Governor  Berkeley,  in  the 
dead  of  winter,  himself  journeyed  to  Maryland  and  at  last 
succeeded  in  convincing  the  leading  men  of  that  colony  of  the 
necessity  of  the  measure.  As  a  result,  the  Maryland  Assembly 
passed  an  act  prohibiting  all  tobacco  planting  in  their  province 
from  February  1666  to  February  1667,  provided  Virginia  and 
North  Carolina  should  do  likewise.^^  The  Assembly  at 
Jamestown  promptly  passed  a  similar  law,  but  the  North 
Carolinians,  owing  to  Indian  troubles,  delayed  their  action  so 
long  that  the  Marylanders  repudiated  the  entire  agreement. 

Somewhat  discouraged  the  colonists  again  sent  commis- 
sioners, this  time  to  Saint  Mary's,  to  resume  the  broken 
thread  of  negotiations.  Here  at  last  success  seemed  to  crown 
their  efforts,  for  all  differences  were  adjusted,  and  the  cessa- 
tion was  agreed  upon  by  the  three  colonies.^^  But  the  joy  of 
Virginia  at  this  happy  outcome  was  soon  turned  to  grief  and 
indignation,  for  the  Marylanders  received  a  letter  from  Lord 
Baltimore,  "in  absolute  and  princely  terms  prohibiting  the 
execution  of  the  .  .  .  articles  of  cessation". 

"This  overtook  us,"  wrote  Governor  Berkeley,  "like  a  storm 
and  enforced  us  like  distressed  marriners  to  throw  our  dear 
bought  commodities  into  the  sea,  when  we  were  in  sight  of  our 

*  Bruce,  Ec.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  390.        ="  P.  R.  O.,  COi-20. 
"F.  R.  O.,  COi-20.    Ludwell  to  Arlington. 


) 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  123 

harbour,  &  with  them  so  drown'd  not  only  our  present  reHefs 
but  all  future  hopes  of  being  able  to  do  ourselves  good, 
whilst  we  are  thus  divided  and  enforced  to  steere  by  anothers 
compasse,  ^hose  needle  is  too  often  touched  with  particular 
interest.  This  unlimited  and  independent  power  ...  of  the 
Lord  Baltimore  doth  like  an  impetuous  wind  blow  from  us 
all  those  seasonable  showers  of  your  Majesty's  Royall  cares 
and  favours,  and  leaves  us,  and  his  own  province  withering 
and  decaying  in  distress  and  poverty.  .  .  .  This  unreason- 
able and  unfortunate  prohibition  .  .  .  hath  not  only  increased 
the  discontent  of  many  of  the  inhabitants  of  his  province,  but 
hath  raised  the  grief  and  anger  of  allmost  all  your  .  .  .  sub- 
jects of  this  colony  to  such  a  height  as  required  great  care  to 
prevent  those  disturbances  which  were  like  to  arise  from  their 
eluded  hopes  and  vain  expences."^* 

Can  there  be  any  doubt  that  the  Navigation  Acts  and  the 
futility  of  all  attempts  to  escape  their  baleful  effects,  were 
largely  instrumental  in  bringing  on  Bacon's  Rebellion?  As 
prosperity  and  contentment  are  the  greatest  safeguards  of  the 
public  peace,  so  poverty,  nakedness  and  distress  are  breeders 
of  sedition.  Philip  Ludwell  spoke  of  Bacon's  army  as  "a 
Rabble  of  the  basest  sort  of  People ;  whose  Condicion  was  such 
as  by  a  chaunge  could  not  admitt  of  worse". ^^  Had  England 
been  less  selfish  in  her  treatment  of  Virginia,  there  would 
not  have  been  so  many  indigent  men  in  the  colony  eager  to 
join  in  this  wild  uprising  against  the  government.  Berkeley 
himself  admitted,  in  1673,  that  at  least  one  third  of  the 
freemen  had  been  rendered  so  desperate  by  poverty  and  debt 
that  in  times  of  foreign  war  their  loyalty  to  England  could 
not  be  relied  upon.^® 

But  Charles  II  was  indifferent  to  the  welfare  of  these 
distant  subjects  and  blind  to  their  growing  dissatisfaction. 
Just  when  the  situation  was  most  critical,  he  aroused  their 
anger  and  grief  to  the  highest  pitch,  by  making  a  gift  of  the 
entire  colony  to  Lord  Culpeper  and  the  Earl  of  Arlington. 
Previously  he  had  granted  that  portion   of  Virginia  which 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21.    Governor  and  Council  to  the  King. 
''P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16.  '•P.  R.  O.,  CO1-80-51. 


124  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

lies  between  the  Potomac  and  the  Rappahannock  rivers, 
known  as  the  Northern  Neck,  to  Lord  Hopton  and  several 
other  noblemen.  These  patentees  were  to  receive  fees,  remain- 
ders, reversions  and  escheats,  and  were  given  power  to  grant 
patents  for  all  land  that  had  not  been  taken  up.  This  had 
caused  the  people  of  Virginia,  and  especially  those  residing 
in  the  Northern  Neck,  great  uneasiness,  and  had  proved  a 
serious  hindrance  to  the  settling  of  that  region.  The  Assem- 
bly, dreading  the  clash  of  jurisdiction  which  this  grant  made 
almost  inevitable,  had  sent  agents  to  England  to  persuade  the 
King  to  annul  the  patent,  or  permit  the  purchase  of  the 
tract  by  the  colony.  While  they  were  working  to  this  end, 
there  came  the  unexpected  news  that  Arlington  and  Culpeper 
had  received  a  grant  of  the  entire  colony.  Without  consult- 
ing in  the  least  the  desires  of  the  people,  Charles  had  given 
them  over  to  two  unscrupulous  favorites,  with  the  indiffer- 
ence he  might  have  shown  in  presenting  a  necklace  to  his 
mistress.  The  colonists,  "to  their  unspeakable  griefe  and 
Astonishment",  felt  now  that  they  were  "reduced  tb  a  far 
worse  condition  than  that  wherein  they  had  adventured  their 
lives  and  fortunes  for  the  planting  that  Country  under  the 
Company".^'' 

The  privileges  and  powers  granted  in  this  patent,  had  they 
ever  been  exercised  by  Arlington  and  Culpeper,  would  have 
rendered  the  government  at  Jamestown  almost  a  nullity.  The 
two  lords  were  to  receive  all  escheats,  quit-rents,  duties  and 
reservations  belonging  to  the  Crown;  they  were  given  power 
to  divide  the  territory  into  counties,  hundreds  and  parishes; 
to  erect  churches  and  present  ministers  to  them;  to  make 
manors,  fairs,  and  markets ;  to  appyoint  sheriffs,  surveyors,  and 
other  important  officers;  to  issue  patents  for  land;  to  appro- 
priate to  their  own  use  all  arrears  of  "rents  and  other  profits", 
accruing  since  the  year  1669. 

In  great  alarm  the  Virginia  Assembly  directed  the  agents 
in  England  to  use  their  utmost  endeavors  to  have  this  grant 
recalled.  At  the  same  time  they  drew  up  a  statement  of  their 
objections  to  the  patent,   showing  how  unjust  and   ruinous 

'^  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-34-101. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  125 

were  its  provisions.  It  was  in  direct  conflict  with  numerous 
royal  concessions  and  patents,  given  them  from  time  to  time 
under  the  Great  Seal.  There  was  good  reason  to  fear  that  the 
lords,  by  their  deputies,  might  impose  upon  them  new  rents 
and  services.  They  might  demand  new  surveys  and  new 
patents  for  land  which  had  long  been  occupied.  They  might, 
in  fact,  completely  devastate  the  government  of  all  its  "just 
powers  and  authorities". 

The  agents,  upon  receiving  these  instructions,  went  to  the 
Lords  Patentees  to  request  them  to  resign  the  most  obnoxious 
of  their  new  powers.^*  In  case  they  refused,  the  agents 
threatened  to  appeal  at  once  to  the  King.  Arlington  and  Cul- 
peper  received  them  courteously,  and,  after  numerous  delays, 
consented  to  relinquish  the  patent,  provided  Virginia  would 
offer  no  objection  to  the  passing  of  a  new  grant,  assuring 
them  the  quit-rents  and  escheated  property.  The  agents  were 
well  satisfied  with  this  settlement,  for  it  would  relieve  the 
colony  of  its  fear  of  proprietary  government,  while  the  grant 
of  the  rents  and  escheats  would  impose  little  additional 
burden. ^^ 

In  order,  however,  to  prevent  the  giving  away  of  such 
disturbing  powers  in  the  future,  they  petitioned  the  King  to 
grant  "Letters  Pattents  for  the  incorporacon"  of  the  colony.^" 
In  this  new  charter  they  desired  first  that  permission  be  given 
Virginia  to  purchase  the  Northern  Neck.  They  next  re- 
quested the  King  to  promise  that  Virginia  should  have  no 
other  dependence  than  upon  the  Crown  of  England,  "nor  in 
the  future  be  cantonized  into  parcells  by  grants  made  to  par- 
ticular persons".  "And  for  the  prevention  of  surreptitious 
grants"  they  desired  his  Majesty  to  promise  in  the  charter 
that  nothing  should  again  pass  concerning  Virginia  until  a 
hearing  had  been  given  to  some  person  impowered  by  the 
colony  to  represent  their  interests.  Of  even  greater  impor- 
tance was  their  desire,  "That  there  shall  bee  no  Taxe  or 
Imposition  layd  on  the  people  of  Virginia,  but  by  their  owne 

''P.  R.  O.,  COi-28-20;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  Appendix  XXXVI. 

=*  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  5i8-543 ;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  Appendix  XXXIII-LXII. 

'"'P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -34-95. 


126  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Consente,  and  that  Express'd  by  the  Representatives  in 
Assembly.  "^^ 

The  whole  matter  came  before  the  King  in  Council,  June 
23,  1675,  and  was  referred  to  the  judgment  of  Attorney- 
General  William  Jones  and  Solicitor-General  Francis  Win- 
nington.^-  In  October  these  officers  reported  that  in  their 
opinion  the  patent  of  incorporation  would  be  beneficial  both 
to  the  colony  and  the  King's  service,  and  ought  to  be  granted. 
Charles  thereupon  gave  directions  that  the  papers  be  drawn 
up  for  his  signature.  But  here,  for  some  unknown  reason,  the 
matter  came  to  a  halt.  Several  months  passed  and  the  patent 
had  not  been  issued. ^^  At  last,  April  19,  1676,  at  the 
urgent  request  of  the  agents,  his  Majesty  directed  that  the 
Lord  Chancellor  cause  the  papers  to  pass  the  Great  Seal  at 
once.  But  before  this  could  be  done,  news  came  to  Eng- 
land of  Bacon's  RebelHon,  and  the  King  immediately  reversed 
his  order.  Later,  other  Letters  Patent  were  granted,  but 
they  were  very  different  from  those  sought  by  the  agents,  and 
contained  little  more  than  a  bare  declaration  of  the  colony's 
direct  dependence  upon  the  Crown  of  England.^'* 

This  unsatisfactory  business  caused  great  irritation  among 
the  colonists.  The  heavy  expense  of  carrying  on  the  negotia- 
tions in  England  "made  them  desperately  uneasie,  especially 
when,  after  a  whole  Year's  Patience  .  .  .  they  had  no  En- 
couragement from  their  Agents". ^^  A  tax  of  fifty  pounds  of 
tobacco  per  poll,  imposed  for  the  purchase  of  the  Northern 
Neck,  aroused  widespread  dissatisfaction.  In  April,  1676, 
Governor  Berkeley,  fully  conscious  of  the  mutterings  of  revo- 
lution, was  awaiting  with  anxiety  the  arrival  of  favorable 
news  from  the  agents.  "There  are  divers,"  he  wrote,  "that 
would  fain  persuade  the  people  that  al  their  high  taxes  will 
bring  them  no  benefit,  so  that  if  the  most  advantageous  terms 
had  been  proposed  to  us  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  have 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-34-96;  CO1-34-100;  COT-33-108;  COI-34-9S;  Hen.,  Vol. 
II,  p.  529. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-34-100. 
"P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-48;  Hen.  Vol.  II,  p.  534- 
»*  P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-133  to  137 ;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  Appendix  LXI. 
"  Beverley. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  127 

persuaded  the  people  to  have  parted  with  more  tobacco  til  a 
more  certain  demonstration  had  been  given  them  of  what  is 
already  done.  I  appeased  two  mutinies  this  last  year  raysed 
by  some  secret  villaines  that  whispered  amongst  the  people 
that  there  was  nothing  intended  by  the  fifty  pounds  levy  but 
the  enriching  of  some  few  people. "^^  In  1677,  after  Bacon's 
Rebellion,  the  King's  commissioners  heard  from  all  sides  that 
the  imposition  of  this  tax  was  one  of  the  main  causes  of 
discontent.^''' 

The  wars  of  1664  and  1672  with  Holland  added  much  to  the 
distress  in  Virginia.  The  bold  Dutch  mariners,  angered  at 
the  injury  done  them  by  the  Navigation  Acts,  preyed  upon 
the  English  merchantmen  in  every  sea.  Woe  to  the  tobacco 
ship  that  encountered  a  hostile  privateer,  in  its  journey  across 
the  Atlantic!  The  English  vessels  were  not  safe  even  in  the 
Virginia  rivers,  under  the  guns  of  their  forts.  Twice  the 
daring  Dutch  came  through  the  capes  and  into  the  James 
River  itself,  where  they  wrought  great  damage  to  the  shipping. 

It  was  the  custom,  during  these  times  of  danger,  for  the 
merchant  vessels  of  Virginia  and  Maryland  to  cross  the 
Atlantic  in  large  fleets,  under  the  protection  of  English  men- 
of-war.  In  May  1667,  some  twenty  vessels  were  anchored 
in  the  mouth  of  James  River,  near  Newport  News,  awaiting 
the  remainder  of  their  fleet  before  sailing.  Three  leagues 
above  them  lay  the  Elisabeth,'  a  frigate  of  forty-six  guns, 
sent  by  the  King  for  the  protection  of  the  colony.  She  was 
undergoing  repairs,  however,  having  become  "soe  disabled  in 
her  Maste  and  Leaky  in  her  Hull  as  that  she  could  not  keep 
at  sea",  and  for  the  moment  afforded  little  proctection  to  the 
merchantmen  riding  below.^^ 

At  this  juncture,  a  fleet  of  five  Dutch  warships,  under 
the  command  of  Abraham  Crimson,  appeared  off  the  coast, 
bent  on  mischief  to  the  English  shipping.  The  Hollanders, 
learning  of  the  exf>osed  position  of  the  tobacco  fleet  from  the 
crew  of  a  shallop  which  fell  into  their  hands,  determined  upon 
a  bold  attack.     On  their  way  to  the  capes  they  encountered  a 

^P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-37.  "P.  R   O,  CO5-1371-292,  331. 

^P   R.  O.,  CO1-21-61. 


< 


128  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

ship  of  London  bound  from  Tangier  to  Virginia.  The  Eng- 
lish master,  Captain  Conway,  "fought  them  very  well  for 
two  hours,  but  at  last  being  wounded  himself  and  over 
powered  with  men,  was  taken  by  them".^® 

The  Dutchmen  came  into  Chesapeake  Bay  June  4,  and 
anchored  there  over  night.  The  next  morning,  taking  ad- 
vantage of  a  fair  easterly  breeze,  they  sailed  boldly  into  the 
mouth  of  the  James.  In  order  to  take  their  prey  entirely 
by  surprise  they  flew  the  English  colors,  and  as  they  passed 
the  merchantmen,  hailed  them  in  English  and  sang  out  their 
soundings  in  English.  Proceeding  directly  up  to  the  unsus- 
pecting frigate,  they  threw  aside  their  disguise  with  the  roar 
of  three  volleys.  The  captain  of  the  Elizabeth  had  gone 
ashore,  to  attend  a  wedding  it  was  said,  and  had  left  but 
thirty  men  on  board.^^  Without  officers,  and  surprised  by 
superior  numbers,  the  sailors  could  make  no  effective  resis- 
tance. Several  r«shed  to  their  guns,  but  they  fired  only  one 
piece  of  ordnance  before  they  were  forced  to  surrender. 
While  some  of  the  Dutchmen  were  securing  the  Elizabeth, 
the  others  turned  upon  the  helpless  merchantmen  and 
succeeded  in  capturing  the  entire  fleet.  Several  of  the  ships 
might  have  saved  themselves  by  running  into  the  Elizabeth 
River,  where  the  enemy  would  not  have  dared  to  follow  them, 
but  they  seemed  paralyzed  with  surprise  and  fell  an  unresist- 
ing prey.*^ 

Great  was  the  grief  and  rage  of  Sir  William  Berkeley 
when  news  of  this  disaster  reached  him.  How  could  he 
answer  to  the  King  for  the  loss  of  the  royal  frigate  and  twenty 
English  merchantmen?  With  great  promptness  and  resolu- 
tion he  decided  to  fit  out  all  available  vessels  in  the  colony 
for  a  sally  upon  the  enemy.  In  the  upper  James  were  three 
merchantmen  and  in  the  York  nine.  If  these  could  be  sup- 
plied quickly  with  guns  and  men,  there  might  yet  be  time  to 
defeat  the  Dutch  and  rescue  the  captured  ships.  The  Gov- 
ernor, who  was  ever  reckless  in  exposing  his  person,  resolved 
to  direct  the  attack  himself  in  the  good  ship  Admirall.     But 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21-61.  **?.  R.  O.,  CO1-21-63. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21-61,  62. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  129 

some  of  the  masters  by  no  means  relished  the  thought  of 
risking  their  vessels  and  their  cargoes  in  a  battle  with  the 
Dutch.  When  the  Governor  impressed  them  into  the  King's 
service  by  putting  the  broad  arrow  upon  their  masts,  they 
pretended  obedience,  but  used  such  delays  that  the  fleet  could 
not  be  prepared  in  time.  Captain  Light  foot,  of  the  Elisabeth, 
grieved  by  the  loss  of  his  ship,  "very  passionately  resolved  to 
hazard  himself  in  the  Admirall",  while  several  members  of 
the  Council  and  forty  other  gentlemen  volunteered  their  ser- 
vices. Upon  the  shore  were  assembled  four  regiments  of 
militia,  ready  to  embark  should  they  be  needed.  Yet  the 
masters  continued  their  procrastination  day  after  day  until  the 
Dutch  escaped. 

Nor  had  Admiral  Crimson  shown  any  haste  to  be  off.  Soon 
after  the  battle  he  had  burned  five  or  six  of  the  merchantmen, 
"for  want  of  men  to  man  them".  It  had  also  been  necessary 
for  him  to  destroy  the  frigate,  which  was  still  out  of  repair 
and  far  from  seaworthy.  He  had  sent  parties  ashore  several 
times  to  secure  water,  which  he  greatly  needed,  but  they  had 
been  driven  back  with  ease.  After  a  stay  of  five  or  six  days 
in  James  River,  he  sailed  away  with  his  prizes,  leaving  the 
Governor  to  dismiss  his  militia  and  write  home  his  accusa- 
tions against  the  masters.*^ 

Warned  by  this  experience,  the  English  government,  upon 
the  outbreak  of  the  war  of  1672,  sent  two  men-of-war  to 
Virginia.  These  vessels,  in  July  1673,  were  stationed  at  the 
mouth  of  the  James  guarding  a  large  fleet  of  merchantmen, 
when  news  came  that  nine  Dutch  warships  were  approaching 
the  capes.  Instantly  preparations  were  made  to  fight  them. 
Several  of  the  tobacco  ships  were  forced  into  service  and 
fitted  with  guns.  Sailors  were  taken  from  the  smaller  vessels 
to  help  man  the  larger.  But  before  all  could  be  put  in  readi- 
ness the  enemy  came  through  the  capes  and  anchored  at 
Lynhaven  Bay.^^ 

The  English  had  as  yet  little  apprehension  for  the  safety  of 
their  merchantmen,  for  they  could  at  any  time  run  under 
the  guns  of  a  fort  at  Nansemond,  or  could  retreat  up  the 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21-61,  62,  63.  «P.  R.  O.,  COi-30-5r,  53,  71. 


130  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

James  while  their  men-of-war  held  back  the  enemy.  At 
this  moment,  however,  there  appeared  across  the  waters  of 
the  Chesapeake  eight  sail  of  the  Maryland  fleet,  unconscious 
of  their  danger  and  bearing  down  upon  the  Dutch.  The  Eng- 
lish commanders  realized  that  only  instant  action  could  save 
them.  Taking  with  them  six  of  the  tobacco  ships  they  sailed 
out  to  give  battle. 

"But  before  they  came  within  reach  of  gun  shot  4  of  the 
merchant  ships  came  on  ground."  One  turned  back  to  the 
James.  But  the  other  three  ships  went  on,  and  unaided  fought 
six  of  the  largest  Dutchmen.  For  three  hours  the  battle  con- 
tinued with  great  fury.  At  last  Captain  Gardner,  one  of  the 
English  commanders,  "judging  that  the  enemy  (if  he  checkt 
them  not)  would  be  in  with  (the)  merchant  ships  riding  in 
James  river  .  .  .  tacked  alone  upon  them  with  Extra  ordi- 
nary courage,  and  for  at  least  one  houre  fought  them  all.  .  .  . 
But,  having  all  his  greate  maste  and  his  fore  topmast  des- 
perately wounded,  and  most  of  his  rigging  shot",  he  was  at 
last  forced  to  retire.  "With  as  much  courage  as  conduct 
(and  beyond  the  hopes  or  expectation  of  those  who  saw 
that  brave  action)  (he)  disengaged  himselfe  .  .  .  and 
brought  off  all  the  Marylanders  but  one."  The  Virginia  fleet, 
"which  were  neere  40  sail",  secured  "almost  a  tides  way  before 
the  enemy,  which  undoubtedly  saved  many  which  otherwise 
would  have  bin  lost".  Some  of  the  merchantmen  took  refuge 
at  Fort  Nansemond,  where  the  enemy  dared  not  attack  them, 
others  retreated  up  the  river  towards  Jamestown.  Unfor- 
tunately five  of  them,  in  the  confusion  of  the  flight,  ran 
aground  and  were  afterwards  captured.  The  four  ships 
which  had  grounded  before  the  battle  also  fell  into  the  hands 
of  the  Dutch.  Thus,  despite  the  gallant  conduct  of  the  Eng- 
lish, the  enemy  succeeded  in  capturing  a  large  part  of  the 
tobacco  fleet.  *^ 
^  Great  as  was  the  distress  caused  by  the  depredations  of 
the  Dutch,  the  planters  suffered  even  more  during  these  wars 
by  the  stagnation  of  trade.  The  great  risk  incurred  in  cross- 
ing the  ocean  necessarily  brought  an  increase  both  in  freight 

**P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-51,  53. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  131 

rates  and  in  the  cost  of  manufactured  goods.  In  1667  the 
Governor  and  Council  declared  that  the  planters  were  "in- 
forced  to  pay  12  pounds  to  £17  per  ton  freight"  on  their 
tobacco,  "which  usually  was  but  at  seven  pounds". ^^  Condi- 
tions were  even  worse  during  the  second  war.  In  1673  Ber- 
keley complained  that  the  number  of  vessels  that  dared  come 
to  Virginia  was  so  small,  that  they  had  "not  brought  goods 
and  tools  enough  for  one  part  of  five  of  the  people  to  go  on 
with  their  necessary  labor".  "And  those  few  goods  that  are 
brought,"  he  added  "have  Soe  few  (and  these  hard  Dealing) 
Sellers  and  Soe  many  Indigent  and  necessitous  buyors  that  the 
Poore  Planter  gets  not  the  fourth  part  .  .  .  for  his  tobacco 
which  he  usually  has  had  in  other  times."^^ 

In  this  period,  so  full  of  suffering  and  misfortune,  the 
year  1667  was  especially  noteworthy  for  its  long  series  of 
disasters.  In  November  Secretary  Thomas  Ludwell  wrote 
Lord  Berkeley,  "This  poore  Country  ...  is  now  reduced  to 
a  very  miserable  Condicon  by  a  continuall  course  of  misfor- 
tune. In  Aprill  ...  we  had  a  most  prodigeous  Storme  of 
haile,  many  of  them  as  bigg  as  Turkey  Eggs,  which  destroyed 
most  of  our  younge  Mast  and  Cattell.  On  the  fifth  of  June 
following  came  the  Dutch  upon  us,  and  did  soe  much  mis- 
chiefe  that  we  shall  never  recover  our  reputations.  .  .  . 
They  were  not  gone  before  it  fell  to  raineing  and  continued 
for  40  dayes  together,  which  Spoiled  much  of  what  the  haile 
had  left  of  our  English  Graine.  But  on  the  27th  of  August 
followed  the  most  Dreadful  Hurry  Cane  that  ever  the  colony 
groaned  under.  It  lasted  24  hours,  began  at  North  East  and 
went  round  northerly  till  it  came  to  west  and  soe  on  till  it 
came  to  South  East  where  it  ceased.  It  was  accompanied  with 
a  most  violent  raine,  but  no  Thunder.  The  night  of  it  was 
the  most  Dismall  tyme  that  ever  I  knew  or  heard  off,  for  the 
wind  and  rain  raised  soe  Confused  a  noise,  mixt  with  the  con- 
tinuall Cracks  of  falling  houses.  .  .  .  The  waves  (were)  im- 
petuously beaten  against  the  Shoares  and  by  that  violence 
forced  and  as  it  were  crowded  up  into  all  Creeks,  Rivers  and 
bayes  to  that  prodigeous  height  that  it  hazarded  the  drownd- 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21-61.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-17. 


132  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

ing  many  people  who  lived  not  in  sight  of  the  Rivers,  yet 
were  then  forced  to  climbe  to  the  topp  of  their  houses  to  keep 
them  selves  above  water.  (The  waves)  carry ed  all  the  foun- 
dation of  the  fort  at  point  Comfort  into  the  River  and  most  of 
our  Timber  which  was  very  chargably  brought  thither  to  per- 
fect it.  Had  it  been  finished  and  a  garison  in  it,  they  had 
been  Stormed  by  such  an  enemy  as  noe  jx)wer  but  Gods  can 
restraine.  .  .  .  Had  the  Lightning  accompanied  it  we  could 
have  beleeved  nothing  else  from  such  a  confusion  but  that  all 
the  elements  were  at  Strife,  which  of  them  should  doe  most 
towards  the  reduction  of  the  creation  into  a  Second  Chaos.  It 
was  wonderful  to  consider  the  contrary  effects  of  that  Storme, 
for  it  blew  some  shipps  from  their  Anchors  and  carryed  them 
safe  over  shelves  of  Sand  where  a  wherry  could  Difficultly 
passe,  and  yet  knockt  out  the  bottome  of  a  ship  ...  in  eight 
foot  water  more  than  she  drew.  But  when  the  morning  came 
and  the  Sun  risen  it  would  have  comforted  us  after  such  a 
night,  had  it  not  lighted  us  to  ye  Ruines  of  our  plantations, 
of  which  I  thinke  not  one  escaped.  The  nearest  computation 
is  at  least  10,000  houses  blowne  downe,  all  the  Indian  Graine 
laid  flatt  upon  the  ground,  all  the  Tobacco  in  the  fields  torne 
to  pieces  and  most  of  that  which  was  in  the  houses  perished 
with  them.  The  fences  about  the  Corne  fields  (were)  either 
blown  down  or  beaten  to  the  ground  by  trees  which  fell  upon 
them  &  before  the  owners  could  repaire  them  the  hoggs  & 
Cattell  gott  in  and  in  most  places  devoured  much  of  what  the 
Storme  had  left."^^ 

In  the  midst  of  the  second  Dutch  war  came  another  scourge 
no  less  distressing  than  the  great  hurricane.  Throughout  the 
17th  century  cattle  raising  was  one  of  the  most  important 
industries  of  the  small  Virginia  proprietors.  No  planter, 
however  insignificant  his  holdings,  was  without  his  cow  and 
his  calf.^^  They  constituted  a  most  important  portion  of  his 
wealth,  and  an  indispensable  source  of  support.  In  the  win- 
ter of   1672-3  occurred  an  epidemic  which  destroyed  more 

*'P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21. 

**This  is  shown  by  the  wills  of  this  period,  many  of  which  have  been 
published  in  the  Virginia  Magazine  of  History  and  Biography. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  133 

than  half  the  cattle  of  Virginia.  The  mortality  was  increased 
by  the  cold,  which  was  unusually  severe.  Many  men,  in  an 
effort  to  preserve  the  poor  beasts,  gave  them  all  their  corn 
and  thus  brought  hunger  upon  themselves.  Before  relief  came 
with  the  spring,  fifty  thousand  cattle  had  perished. ^^ 

Perhaps  the  people  of  Virginia  might  have  borne  patiently 
all  these  misfortunes,  had  their  Governor  ruled  them  with 
wisdom  and  justice.  Certain  it  is  they  would  never  have 
turned  in  wild  anger  to  strike  down  his  government,  had  that 
government  not  done  much  to  make  their  condition  intolerable. 
Sir  William  Berkeley  was  accused  of  destroying  the  repre- 
sentative character  of  the  Assembly,  of  initiating  a  notorious 
spoils  system,  of  intimidating  Burgesses,  of  winking  at  em- 
bezzlement of  public  funds.  And,  although  most  of  these 
charges  were  brought  by  the  Governor's  bitter  enemies,  some 
of  them  were  undoubtedly  true. 

In  Virginia,  during  this  period,  the  commons  could  guard 
their  interests  only  by  means  of  the  House  of  Burgesses.  All 
other  organs  of  government  were  controlled  by  Berkeley 
and  his  friends.  The  people  had  no  voice  in  the  selection  of 
vestrymen,  or  sheriffs,  or  justices  of  the  peace,  and  no  control 
over  their  actions.  The  Council  was  entirely  submissive  to 
the  Governor's  will.  Its  members  not  only  held  their  seats 
at  Sir  William's  pleasure,  but  were  the  recipients  of  numerous 
other  favors  that  bound  them  closely  to  his  interest.  Thus  in 
the  executive,  in  all  branches  of  the  judiciary,  and  in  the  upper 
house  of  Assembly  the  Governor  was  all-powerful. 

If  then  he  could  control  the  Burgesses  and  make  them  sub- 
servient to  his  desires,  he  would  remove  the  only  obstacle  to 
almost  complete  despotism.  Nor  was  it  a  matter  of  very  great 
difficulty  for  him  to  gain  a  mastery  of  the  House.  In  every 
county  he  could  nominate  government  candidates,  and  exert 
tremendous  pressure  to  secure  their  election.  If  necessary, 
they  might  be  seated  by  fraud  at  the  polls  or  false  returns  by 
the  sheriff.^^  "It  is  true,"  Bacon  declared,  "that  the  people's 
hopes  of  redemption  did  ly  in  the  Assembly,  as  their  Trusts, 
and  Sanctuary  to  fly  to,  but  I  would  have  all  men  consider 

**P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-17;  CO1-30-51.      '"Hen.,  H,  p.  356. 


134  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

first  how  poore  people  are  debarred  of  their  fair  election, 
the  great  men  in  many  places  haveing  the  Country  in  their 
debte  and  consequently  in  their  aw.  Secondly  how  meanly 
we  are  provided  of  men  of  Learning,  ability  and  courage,  nay 
indeed  of  honesty,  to  stand  up  in  the  people's  behalf  and 
oppose  the  oppressing  party.  "^^ 

And  if  ever,  despite  these  difficulties,  the  candidates  of  the 
people  were  elected,  the  Governor  might  still  win  their  support 
in  the  House,  by  a  judicious  use  of  the  patronage.  He  con- 
trolled enough  offices  of  honor  and  profit  to  reward  richly 
his  friends  in  the  Assembly.  If  the  Burgess  was  careful  never 
to  thwart  the  wishes  of  the  Governor,  or  to  vote  against  his 
measures,  he  might  reasonably  expect  a  collectorship,  a  sher- 
iff's place,  a  commission  in  the  militia,  or  possibly  a  seat  in 
the  Council.  A  large  percentage  of  the  members  of  the 
House  were  office-holders.^^ 

If  half  the  charges  brought  against  Berkeley  are  to  be  be- 
lieved, he  was  guilty  of  instituting  a  system  of  political 
corruption  as  effective  as  that  maintained  in  France  by 
Guizot  during  the  reign  of  Louis  Philippe.  He  has  assumed 
to  himself,  it  was  declared,  "the  sole  nominating,  appointing 
and  commissionating  of  all  .  .  .  officers  both  civil  and  mili- 
tary amongst  us  .  .  .  (they)  being  .  .  .  (the  better  to  in- 
crease ...  his  party)  multiplied  to  a  greate  number.  .  ,  . 
All  which  offices  he  bestowed  on  such  persons  (how  unfitt  or 
unskillfull  soever)  as  he  conceived  would  be  most  for  his 
designs.  And  that  the  more  firmely  to  binde  and  oblige  them 
thereunto  and  allure  others  to  his  party,  he  .  .  .  permitted 
or  connived  at  the  persons  soe  commissionated  by  him  ,  .  .  un- 
warrantably ...  to  lay  and  impose  what  levies  and  imposicons 
upon  us  they  should  or  did  please,  which  they  would  often 
extort  from  us  by  force  and  violence,  and  which  for  the  most 
part  they  converted  to  their  owne  private  lucre  and  gaine. 
And  .  .  .  Sir  William  Berkeley,  haveing  by  these  wayes  and 
meanes,  and  by  takeing  upon  him  contrary  to  law  the  grant- 
ing collectors  places,  sherifs,  and  other  offices  of  profitt  to 
whome  he  best  pleased,  he  soe  gained  uppon  and  obliged  all 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-241,  246.  "Bruce,  Inst.  Hist,  Vol.  I,  p.  489. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  135 

the  greatest  number  of  the  men  of  parts  and  estates  in  the 
whole  country  (out  of  which  it  was  necessary  our  representa- 
tives and  Burgesses  should  be  elected)  hath  there  by  soe 
fortifyed  his  power  over  us,  as  of  himselfe  without  respect  to 
our  laws,  to  doe  what  soever  he  best  pleased,  and  from  time 
to  time  ...  to  gaine  and  procure  great  quantities  of  Tobacco 
and  mony  from  us  to  his  proper  use  over  and  besides  the 
Thousand  pounds  yearly  salary  .  .  .  and  over  and  besides  the 
fees,  profitts  and  per  quisites  to  the  place  of  Governour 
belonging.  "^^ 

Bacon  himself  declared,  in  justification  of  his  rebellion,  that 
oppression  and  injustice  were  rife  in  the  colony,  and  that  it 
was  useless  to  appeal  to  the  Assembly  for  redress.  "The 
poverty  of  the  Country  is  such,"  he  said,  "that  all  the  power 
and  sway  is  got  into  the  hands  of  the  rich,  who  by  extortious 
advantages,  having  the  common  people  in  their  debt,  have 
always  curbed  and  oppressed  them  in  all  manner  of  wayes." 
The  poor,  he  declared,  were  kept  in  such  perpetual  bondage 
that  it  was  not  p>ossible  for  labor  or  industry  to  extricate  them. 
The  great  men  of  the  colony  had  brought  misery  and  ruin 
upon  the  common  people  by  perverting  all  equity  and  right. 
The  perpetual  breach  of  laws,  remiss  prosecutions,  excuses  and 
evasions,  but  too  plainly  attested  that  things  were  carried  by 
the  men  at  the  helm,  "as  if  it  were  but  to  play  a  booty,  game 
or  divide  a  spoile".  "Now  consider,"  he  adds,  "what  hope 
there  is  of  redress  in  appealing  to  the  very  persons  our  com- 
plaints do  accuse."^* 

And  when  once  the  Governor  had  obtained  a  House  that 
was  subservient  to  his  will,  he  might,  by  his  power  of  pro- 
rogation, continue  it  indefinitely.  During  the  years  from  the 
Restoration  to  Bacon's  Rebellion,  there  were  not  more  than 
two  general  elections,  and  probably  only  one — that  of  1661.^^ 

■"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  135,  136.        "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-241. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-T37i-3'i6,  319.  The  Assembly  which  met  in  March, 
1661,  was  continued  by  successive  prorogations  until  October,  1665.  This 
fact  is  placed  beyond  question  by  the  copies  of  the  Acts  of  Assembly  now 
preserved  in  the  British  Public  Record  Office.  But  there  is  no  statement 
in  these  copies  that  the  session  of  June  5,  1666,  had  been  prorogued 
from  an   earlier  date.     Nor   is  there   any   indication   given  in   Hening's 


136  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUA'RTS 

Under  these  circumstances  the  Assembly  could  no  longer  be 
said  to  represent  the  voters  of  the  colony.  The  Burgesses 
might  defy  or  betray  the  people  as  they  chose,  they  could  not 
be  made  to  answer  at  the  polls  for  their  misconduct.  And 
their  is  ample  proof  that  this  Long  Assembly  attended  more 
to  the  commands  of  the  Governor  than  to  the  wishes  of  elec- 
tors that  could  no  longer  elect.  Even  Sir  William's  best 
friends  admitted  that  his  authority  in  Virginia  was  almost 
despotic.  Secretary  Thomas  Ludwell,  writing  in  1666,  de- 
clared that  the  Governor  was  "the  sole  author  of  the  most 
substantial  part"  of  the  government,  "either  for  Lawes  or 
other  inferior  institutions".^®  "Our  representatives,"  com- 
plained the  Charles  City  commons  eleven  years  later  "(of 
which  for  this  county  in  nine  yeares  time  last  past  there  hath 
been  a  verry  doubtful  election  as  we  conceive)  have  been 
overswayed  by  the  power  and  prevalency  of  ...  Sir  Wm. 
Berkeley  and  his  councell,  divers  instances  of  which  wet 
conceive  might  be  given,  and  have  neglected  our  grievances 
made  knowne  to  them."^'^ 

That  this  overthrow  of  representative  government  in  the 

Statutes  that  this  was  not  a  new  Assembly.  (Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  224.)  These 
two  omissions,  then,  might  lead  us  to  infer  that  there  was  a  general 
election  in  1666.  But  there  is  other  evidence  tending  to  show  that  the 
Assembly  of  1661  was  not  dissolved  until  1676.  Thus  William  Sherwood 
wrote  during  Bacon's  Rebellion  that  the  rabble  had  risen  against  the 
Assembly  and  seemed  weary  of  it,  "in  that  itt  was  of  14  years  continuance". 
(P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-17;  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  170.)  The  account  of  the 
Rebellion  given  in  the  Collections  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society 
also  declares  that  the  session  had  "continued  fowerteene  yeares".  (Mass. 
S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  169.)  The  Isle  of  Wight  grievances  state  that  the 
people  of  that  county  had  not  had  an  election  of  Burgesses  for  twelve  years. 
(Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  p.  380.)  Lists  of  the  members  at  the  sessions  of 
September,  1663,  and  of  October,  1666,  have  been  preserved  by  Hening. 
Nineteen  Burgesses  of  the  Assembly  of  1663  appear  also  in  1666;  eleven 
have  lost  their  seats  and  in  their  places  are  fifteen  new  members.  But 
this  settles  nothing,  for  it  is  quite  possible  that  if  an  election  was  held 
in  1666,  the  Governor's  influence  might  have  secured  the  return  of  many 
old  Burgesses.  There  was  no  election  from  June  1666  to  June  1676. 
It  must  remain,  then,  undetermined  whether  the  Long  Assembly  con- 
tinued for  ten  or  for  fifteen  years. 
"•P.  R.  O.,  C0r-20.  "Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  141,  142. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  I37 

colony  and  the  substitution  of  the  Governor's  despotic  sway- 
contributed  greatly  to  the  anger  aiid  desperation  of  the  people, 
there  can  be  no  doubt.  The  evidence  comes  not  only  from  the 
rebels  and  from  the  county  grievances,  but  from  disinterested 
persons,  and  even  Berkeley's  friends.  "Whatever  palliations," 
wrote  Governor  Thomas  Notley,  of  Maryland,  in  1677,  "the 
grate  men  of  Virginia  may  use  at  the  Councell  board  in  Eng- 
land, .  .  .  yett  you  may  be  sure  .  .  .  much  ...  if  not  every 
tittle"  of  the  accusations  against  them  are  true.  "If  the  ould 
Course  be  taken  and  Coll :  Jeoffreys  build  his  proceedings  upon 
the  ould  ffoundation,  its  neither  him  nor  all  his  Majesties 
Souldiers  in  Virginia,  will  either  satisfye  or  Rule  those  people. 
They  have  been  strangely  dealt  with  by  their  former  Magis- 
tracy."^^ William  Sherwood,  if  we  may  believe  his  own 
statement,  forfeited  Sir  William's  favor  by  reporting  in  Eng- 
land that  "the  general  cry  of  the  country  was  against  ye 
Governour".  And  "it  is  most  true",  he  added,  "that  the  great 
oppressions  &  abuse  of  ye  people  by  ye  Governours  arbitrary 
will  hath  been  ye  cause  of  the  late  troubles  here".^^ 

The  illegitimate  influence  of  Berkeley  over  the  Assembly 
was  the  more  galling  to  the  people  inasmuch  as  they  had  no 
voice  in  local  government.  The  justices  of  the  peace,  who 
exercised  the  most  important  powers  in  the  counties,  received 
their  commissions,  not  by  popular  election,  but  by  executive 
appointment.  And  the  Governor,  although  often  influenced  in 
his  selections  by  the  advice  of  the  Council,  gave  little  heed  to 
the  wishes  of  the  commons.  His  appointees  were  invariably 
men  of  means  and  influence,  and  could  be  relied  upon  to 
uphold  the  interests  of  the  aristocracy  and  the  Governor. 

The  justices  were  members  of  the  county  courts,  and  as 
such  exercised  judicial,  executive  and  legislative  functions  in 
local  affairs.  The  courts  met  every  second  month,  and  were 
empowered  to  settle  cases  involving  not  more  than  ten  pounds 
sterling. ^^  Individual  justices  could  "try  and  determine  any 
cause  to  the  value  of  twenty  shillings  or  two  hundred  pounds 
of  tobacco". ^^     Far  more  important  was  the  power  of  the 

»*P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-88.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-43. 

•* Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  542.      "P.  R.  0-,  COi-20. 


138  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

courts  to  impose  direct  taxes.  The  county  levy  was  usually 
very  heavy.  In  fact,  during  the  Restoration  period,  it  often" 
exceeded  the  public  levy  voted  by  the  Assembly.  In  Lower 
Norfolk  county,  during  the  years  from  1666  to  1683,  the  local 
assessment  amounted  to  188,809  pounds  of  tobacco.^^  This 
sum  seems  to  us  now  almost  insignificant,  but  it  proved  a 
very  real  burden  to  the  indigent  freemen  of  that  unhappy 
period.  Yet  perhaps  the  people  would  not  have  complained 
had  the  assessments  been  voted  by  a  body  elected  by  them- 
selves or  representative  of  their  interests.  They  were  bitterly 
angered,  however,  that  they  should  be  taxed  without  their  own 
consent  and  against  their  wishes,  by  appointees  of  the  Gover- 
nor; and  the  sense  of  wrong  was  aggravated  by  the  fact  that 
the  taxes  were  often  voted  by  the  courts  in  secret  session, 
not  without  grave  suspicions  of  abuses  and  fraud. "^^  "It  has 
been  the  custome,"  it  was  declared  in  the  Surry  grievances,  "of 
the  County  Courts  att  the  laying  of  the  levy  to  withdraw 
into  a  private  Roome  by  which  the  poor  people  not  knowing 
for  what  they  paid  their  levy  did  allways  admire  how  their 
taxes  could  be  so  high."^^  "Wee  desire,"  declared  the  people 
of  the  Isle  of  Wight,  "to  know  for  what  wee  doe  pay  our 
Leavies  everie  year  and  that  it  may  noe  more  be  layd  in 
private."^^  From  Charles  City  came  the  most  startling  charges 
of  fraud  and  oppression.  "The  Commisoners  or  Justices  of 
peace  of  this  county,"  it  was  declared,  "heretofore  have  il- 
legally and  unwarrantably  taken  upon  them  without  our 
consent  from  time  to  time  to  impose,  rayse,  assess  and  levy 
what  taxes,  levies  and  imposicons  upon  us  they  have  at  any 
time  thought  good  or  best  liked,  great  part  of  which  they 
have  converted  to  theire  own  use,  as  in  bearing  their  expense 
at  the  ordinary,  allowing  themselves  wages  for  severall  busi- 
nesses which  ex  officio  they  ought  to  do,  and  other  wayes,  as 
by  account  of  the  same  on  the  booke  for  levies  may  appeare."°* 
The  people  were  even  deprived,  during  Berkeley's  second 
administration,  of  the  right  of  electing  the  vestries.     These 

"Bruce,  Inst.  Hist,  Vol.  II,  566.        "Hen.,  Vol.  II,  357. 

"  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  p.  172.  "  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  p.  389. 

"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  142. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  139 

bodies  had  always  been  composed  of  the  foremost  men  in 
each  parish.  At  this  period  they  succeeded  in  shaking  off 
entirely  the  control  of  the  commons  by  themselves  filling 
all  vacancies  in  their  ranks. ^^  Since  they  exercised  the  power 
of  imposing  a  tax  to  pay  the  ministers'  salaries  and  meet  other 
obligations  of  the  parishes,  this  attempt  to  make  themselves 
self -perpetuating  was  a  matter  of  no  little  importance.^*  The 
people  expressed  their  disapproval  in  the  most  emphatic  terms, 
and  after  Bacon's  Rebellion  requests  came  from  many  coun- 
ties that  the  vestrymen  might  be  chosen,  as  formerly,  by  the 
whole  body  of  parishioners.®^ 

The  unjust  poll-tax,  which  was  then  used  in  the  public, 
county  and  parish  levies,  was  an  unending  source  of  discon- 
tent. There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  bore  with  too  great 
weight  upon  the  poor  people.  "They  complain,"  wrote  Gyles 
Bland,  on  the  eve  of  the  Rebellion,  "that  great  Taxes  are 
imposed  upon  them  every  yeare,  by  wayes  very  unequall, 
Laying  them  very  heavily,  by  the  Poll,  whereby  the  Poorer 
sort  are  in  the  hardest  Condition,"^*^  It  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  many  of  the  servants  and  slaves  were  listed 
as  tithables,  or  persons  subject  to  the  poll  tax.  This  of  course 
tended  to  increase  the  share  of  the  wealthy.  Yet  the  inequality 
was  very  real  and  the  burden  upon  the  poor  very  heavy.  The 
number  of  tithables  assessed  of  a  man  was  by  no  means  an 
accurate  gage  of  his  wealth.  Later  in  the  century,  with  the 
great  influx  of  negro  slaves,  the  burden  upon  the  rich  planters 
increased  and  became  more  nearly  proportionate  to  their 
ability  to  pay. 

Bland  suggested  that  all  inequality  might  be  eliminated  by 
adopting  a  land-tax.  "Which,"  he  said,  "seems  to  be  the 
most  equal  imposition  and  will  generally  take  off  the  complaint 
of  the  people,  although  perhaps  some  of  the  richest  sort  will 
not  like  it,  who  hold  greater  proportions  of  land  than  they 
actually  plant."'^^  The  King's  commissioners  also  thought 
the  land  tax  just,   but  considered  it   "impracticable   there". 

"  Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  67. 

"Bruce,  Inst.  Hist.,  Vol.  I,  p.  tj;  Hen.  Vol.  II,  p.  356. 

•'Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  172,  289,  388. 

'*P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-54.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-54. 


140  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

When  the  people  of  Warwick  county  asked,  "That  all  persons 
may  be  rated  and  taxed  according  to  their  Estates",  the  com- 
missioners reported  that  this  was  "a  thing  to  be  wish'd  but 
never  to  be  granted  them".  If  the  King  should  command  it, 
they  knew  not  how  it  would  be  relished  by  the  landed  men, 
since  the  common  usage  had  been  always  taxing  by  poll.''^^ 

The  universal  discontent  was  still  further  increased  by  the 
wasteful  and  lax  use  of  public  funds.  The  money  which  was 
wrung  from  the  poor  people  by  these  unequal  taxes,  was 
seldom  wisely  or  economically  expended.  Much  was  squan- 
dered upon  foolish  projects,  costly  in  the  extreme,  and  impos- 
sible of  accomplishment.  Such  was  the  attempt  to  build  a 
city  at  Jamestown.  For  many  years  it  had  been  a  matter  of 
regret  to  the  English  government  that  Virginia  should  remain 
so  entirely  a  rural  country.  Not  realizing  that  this  was  but 
the  result  of  exceptional  economic  conditions  and  not  a  sign  of 
weakness  or  decay,  they  sought  more  than  once  to  force  the 
building  of  towns  by  legislative  enactments.  Thus,  in  1662,  in 
accordance  with  the  King's  wishes,  the  Assembly  passed  an 
act  providing  for  the  erection  of  thirty-two  brick  houses  at 
Jamestown."^^  Each  county  was  required  to  build  one  of  these 
houses,  a  levy  of  thirty  pounds  of  tobacco  per  poll  being  laid 
for  that  purpose.  This  attempt  was  foredoomed  to  failure, 
for  if  economic  conditions  could  not  develop  cities  in  the 
colony,  the  mere  erection  of  houses  upon  the  unhealthful 
Jamestown  peninsula  could  accomplish  nothing.  We  learn 
from  Bacon's  Proceedings  that  the  town  at  the  time  of  the 
Rebellion  consisted  of  "som  16  or  18  howses,  .  .  .  and  in 
them  about  a  dozen  families  (for  all  the  howses  are  not  in- 
habited) getting  their  liveings  by  keeping  ordnaries,  at 
extraordnary  rates".  That  there  was  corruption  or  ineffi- 
ciency in  carrying  out  the  orders  of  the  Assembly  seems  cer- 
tain. The  people  of  Isle  of  Wight  county  complained  of  "the 
great  Quantities  of  Tobacco  levyed  for  Building  Houses  of 
publick  use  and  reception  at  Jamestown,  which  were  not  habit- 
able, but  fell  downe  before  the  Finishing  of  them".'^* 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-315.  ™Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  172. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-316-19,  304-5. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  141 

There  were  also  accusations  of  laxness  and  fraud  in  the 
erecting  and  management  of  the  pubHc  industrial  plants.  Very 
grievous  taxes  have  been  laid  on  the  poor  people,  it  was 
claimed,  "for  building  work  houses  and  stoare  houses  and 
other  houses  for  the  propogating  &  encouragem't  of  handi- 
craft and  manufactury,  which  were  by  our  Burgesses  to  our 
great  charge  and  burthen  by  their  long  and  frequent  sitting 
invented  and  proposed.  Yet  for  want  of  due  care  the  said 
houses  were  never  finished  or  made  useful,  and  the  propa- 
gating &  manufactury  wholy  in  a  short  time  neglected,  and 
noe  good  ever  effected  .  .  .  save  the  particular  profitt  of  the 
Undertakers,  who  (as  is  usually  in  such  cases)  were  largely 
rewarded  for  thus  defrauding  us."^^ 

Even  more  frequent  and  bitter  complaints  originated  with 
the  construction  of  forts  upon  the  various  rivers  to  protect 
the  colony  and  the  merchant  ships  from  foreign  foes.  At  the 
outbreak  of  the  war  of  1664  it  was  resolved  to  build  a  fort- 
ress at  Jamestown.  The  ships'  masters  were  not  satisfied  with 
the  selection  of  this  site,  for  obviously  it  afforded  no  protec- 
tion to  vessels  trading  upon  the  Potomac,  York  or  Rappahan- 
nock, and  very  little  to  those  upon  the  lower  James.  After 
one  hundred  pvounds  sterling  had  been  expended  at  James- 
town, the  structure  partly  completed  and  fourteen  guns 
brought  up,  the  merchants  procured  orders  from  the  English 
government  that  the  fort  be  transferred  to  Old  Point.  The 
Governor  and  Council  were  most  reluctant  to  make  this 
change,  but  the  commands  were  so  positive  they  dared  not 
disobey.  So  the  guns  were  conveyed  back  down  the  river 
and  the  work  begun  again.  But  many  serious  difficulties  were 
encountered.  "We  have  been  at  70,ooolb  tobacco  charge," 
wrote  Thomas  Ludwell  in  1667,  "and  have  lost  several  men  in 
the  worke  and  many  of  the  materials  by  storms  breaking  our 
rafts  whereon  we  float  the  timber  to  that  place.  .  .  .  After  all 
(we)  were  forced  to  quit  the  work  as  of  impossible  manage, 
for  great  were  the  difficulties,  and  so  insupportable  would  the 
charge  have  been."'^«     A  few  months  after,  when  the  Dutch 

"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  1^2;  P.  R.  O.,  COT-37-41. 
"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-21. 


142  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

captured  the  tobacco  fleet  in  the  mouth  of  the  James,  this 
fort  seems  to  have  been  deserted.  It  was  utterly  destroyed 
by  the  great  hurricane  of  the  following  August. 

Thereupon  it  was  decided  to  build  five  new  forts,  two  on 
the  James  and  one  upon  each  of  the  other  great  rivers.  The 
charges  for  these  structures  were  to  be  borne  entirely  by  the 
counties  upon  the  rivers  they  were  to  defend.  Whether  from 
miismanagement  or  dishonesty  large  sums  of  money  were  ex- 
pended in  this  undertaking  with  but  little  good  effect.  Ber- 
keley wrote  that  the  colony  lacked  the  skill  either  to  construct 
or  maintain  the  forts.  "We  are  at  continuall  charge,"  he 
declared,  "to  repaire  unskilfull  &  inartificall  buildings."  The 
King's  commissioners  in  1677,  testified  that  the  forts  were 
made  of  "mudd  and  dirt",  and  could  be  of  little  service  against 
the  enemy. ''^^  At  the  beginning  of  the  Dutch  war  of  1672  the 
Assembly  found  them  in  poor  condition  and  incapable  of 
offering  resistance  to  the  enemy.  "For  as  much,"  it  was  de- 
clared, "as  the  materials  .  .  .  were  not  substantial  or  lasting, 
some  have  suffered  an  utter  demolition,  some  very  ruinous 
and  some  capable  of  repair."  It  was  thereupon  ordered  that 
the  forts  be  at  once  restored  and  authority  was  given  for  new 
taxes  to  cover  the  cost.'^^ 

One  at  least  of  the  reconstructed  forts  proved  of  service  in 
the  hour  of  need,  for  it  was  under  the  guns  of  Nansemond 
that  many  of  the  merchantmen  ran  in  July  1673,  from  the 
pursuing  Dutch  men-of-war.  But  the  people  could  see  in  them 
only  a  pretext  for  increasing  their  taxes.  And  it  was  quite 
impossible  to  make  them  believe  that  such  sums  could  be 
expended  to  so  little  purpose  save  by  fraud  or  embezzlement. 
The  Charles  City  conjmons  declared  that  great  quantities  of 
tobacco  had  been  raised  for  building  forts  "which  were  never 
finished  but  suffered  to  goe  to  mine,  the  artillery  buried  in 
sand  and  spoyled  with  rust  for  want  of  care".^*^  From  James 
City  county  came  the  complaint  that  although  heavy  taxes  had 
been  paid  for  fortifications,  there  was  in  1677  "noe  Place  of 
defence  in  ye  Country  sufficient  to  secure  his  Majestys  Sub- 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-292,  7.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-29-31. 

"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  142. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  143 

jects  against  any  Forreign  Invasion".  The  King's  commis- 
sioners substantiated  this  statement.  "We  are  well  assured," 
they  said,  "of  the  Truth  of  this  Complaint,  and  doe  know  that 
the  Forts  erected  could  be  of  noe  use,  Endurance  or  de- 
fence. .  .  .  Yet  were  they  of  great  Expence  to  the  People 
who  paid  Excessively  for  Building  them."^^ 

The  Assembly  had  from  time  to  time  sought  to  make  the 
merchants  trading  to  Virginia  aid  in  the  defense  of  the  colony, 
by  imposing  upon  them  Castle  Duties,  in  the  form  of  a  toll 
of  powder  and  shot.  The  masters  had  more  than  once  com- 
plained of  this  duty,  but  as  it  was  not  very  burdensome  it 
was  allowed  to  remain.  Had  all  the  ammunition  thus  received 
been  used  as  intended  by  law,  the  people  would  have  been 
saved  great  expense,  and  the  forts  made  more  serviceable. 
But  the  contributions,  if  we  may  believe  the  complaints  of  the 
people,  were  often  stolen  by  the  collectors.  "Notwithstand- 
ing," said  the  Isle  of  Wight  commons,  "the  great  quantities 
of  ammunition  payd  by  ships  for  fort  duties  for  the  countries 
service  .  .  .  wee  are  forced  to  provide  powder  and  shott  at 
our  proper  charges."*^  The  Nansemond  grievances  were 
more  explicit  in  their  accusations  of  fraud.  "They  Complayne 
that  the  Castle  duties,  accustomed  to  be  paid  by  the  Masters 
of  Shipps  in  Powder  &  Shott  for  the  service  and  security  of 
the  Country,  is  now  converted  into  Shoes  and  stockings  &c 
as  best  liketh  the  Collectors  of  it  and  disposed  to  their  own 
private  advantage."^^ 

It  would  not  be  just  to  give  credence  to  all  the  accusations 
made  against  Berkeley.  The  King's  commissioners  who  con- 
ducted the  investigation  into  his  conduct,  were  his  enemies; 
while  many  of  the  charges  were  brought  by  those  who  had 
taken  part  in  the  Rebellion.  Thus  the  testimony  against  him 
is  in  most  cases  distinctly  partisan.  Moreover  those  that  were 
closely  associated  with  Sir  William  often  expressed  extrava- 
gant admiration  for  his  ability  and  energy,  and  love  for  his 
character.^^     "He  hath,"  wrote  the   Council   in    1673,   "for 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-292,  7;  CO1-21. 

"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  H,  p.  387.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-330,  33i. 

''P.  R.  O.,  COi-20,  21. 


144  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

neare  30  years  governed  this  colony  with  that  prudence  and 
justice  which  hath  gained  him  both  love  and  reverence  from  all' 
the  Inhabitants  here."^^ 

Singularly  enough  Berkeley  seems  to  have  prided  himself 
upon  his  ability  as  a  ruler.  He  never  forgot  the  compliment 
paid  him  by  the  people  in  1660,  when  they  insisted,  even 
against  his  will,  upon  making  him  their  Governor.  And  long 
after  he  had  forfeited  their  confidence  and  esteem  he  imagined 
himself  as  popular  as  in  his  first  administration.  It  was  a 
bitter  blow  to  his  pride  when  the  commons  rose  against  his 
government  in  1676.  His  proclamations  bear  testimony  to  his 
pain  that  the  youthful  Bacon  should  have  usurped  his  place 
in  the  affections  of  the  people. ^^  His  letter  to  the  King  asking 
to  be  recalled  from  his  government  was  undoubtedly  dictated 
by  wounded  pride.  Upon  the  eve  of  his  final  departure  for 
England  he  did  not  scruple  to  write  Colonel  Jeffreys,  "I  will 
confesse  to  you  that  I  beleeve  that  the  Inhabitants  of  this 
Colony  wil  quickly  find  a  difference  betweene  your  manage- 
ment and  mine."^^ 

It  would  be  difficult  to  reconcile  this  attitude  of  mind  with 
Berkeley's  oppressive  administration,  did  we  not  know  his 
views  upon  governmental  matters.  He  had  never  been  in 
sympathy  with  republican  institutions.  It  was  the  height  of 
folly,  he  thought,  to  allow  the  people  to  participate  either  in 
administrative  or  legislative  affairs.  The  King  alone  should 
rule  f  the  people's  duty  was  to  obey.  It  was  but  five  years 
before  the  Rebellion  that  he  wrote  to  the  Lords  of  Trade  and 
Plantations,  "I  thanke  God  there  is  noe  ffree  schooles  nor  print- 
ing (in  Virginia) ^^  and  I  hope  wee  shall  not  have  these  hun- 
dred yeares,  for  learning  has  brought  disobedience  &  heresaye 
and  sects  into  the  world  and  printing  has  divulged  them,  and 
libells  against  the  best  Government:  God  keepe  us  from 
both."^^     A  man  that  could  utter  such  sentiments  as  these 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-71.  ■"?.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-1. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-40-S4. 

"Mr.    P.   A.    Bruce,   in   his   Institutional   History   of   Virginia   in   the 
Seventeenth  Century,  has  shown  that  this  statement  is  incorrect. 
"P.  R.  O.,  COi-26-77. 


THE  CAUSES  OF  BACON'S  REBELLION  145 

would  not  scruple  to  throttle,  if  he  could,  all  representative  in- 
stitutions in  his  government.  If  he  intimidated  voters  and 
corrupted  the  Burgesses,  it  was  perhaps  because  he  thought 
himself  justified  in  any  measures  that  would  render  the  Gov- 
ernor, the  King's  substitute,  supreme  in  the  government. 

But  whatever  is  the  verdict  of  posterity  upon  the  conduct 
and  motives  of  Sir  William  Berkeley,  the  causes  of  the  Rebel-, 
lion  stand  out  with  great  clearness: — England's  selfish  com- 
mercial policy,  the  Culpeper-Arlington  grant,  the  Dutch  wars, 
storms  and  pestilence,  inefficient  if  not  corrupt  government, 
excessive  taxes.  The  only  wonder  is  that  the  insurrection  did 
not  occur  earlier.  In  fact  two  mutinies  did  break  out  in  1674, 
when  the  excessively  heavy  taxes  of  that  year  were  announced, 
but  the  rebels  lacked  leaders  and  were  suppressed  without 
great  difficulty.^®  As  early  as  1673  the  defection  of  the 
planters  was  so  great  that  it  was  feared  many  might  attempt 
to  deliver  the  colony  into  the  hands  of  the  Dutch.  Berkeley 
wrote  that  a  large  part  of  the  people  were  so  desperately 
poor  that  they  might  reasonably  be  expected  upon  any  small 
advantage  of  the  enemy  to  "revolt  to  them  in  hopes  of  better- 
ing their  Condition  by  Shareing  the  Plunder  of  the  Country 
with  them".®"  A  certain  John  Knight  reported  "that  the 
planters  there  doe  generally  desire  a  trade  with  the  Dutch 
and  all  other  nations  and  would  not  be  singly  bound  to  the 
trade  of  England,  and  speake  openly  there  that  they  are  in 
the  nature  of  slaves,  soe  that  the  hearts  of  the  greatest  part  of 
them  are  taken  away  from  his  Majesty".®^  Thus  the  down- 
trodden planters,  alienated  from  England,  angered  at  the  Gov- 
ernor, even  distrusting  their  own  Assembly,  waited  but  an 
occasion  and  a  leader  to  rise  in  open  rebellion.  A  new  Indian 
war  offered  the  occasion,  and  they  found  their  leader  in  young 
Nathaniel  Bacon. 

^P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-37;  CO1-36-S4.     **?.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-51. 
"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-30-78. 


Ji^ 


CHAPTER  VI 
Bacon's  Rebellion 

For  many  years  Virginia  had  been  at  peac  e  with  the  neigh- 
boring Indians.^  The  long  series  of  wars  which  had  filled 
most  of  the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  had  broken 
the  spirit  and  power  of  the  Pamunkeys,  the  Nansemonds  and 
the  Nottoways.^  The  remnants  of  these  nations  had  become 
dependent  upon  the  English,  paying  them  tribute  and  looking 
to  them  for  protection  from  their  enemies.^  In  1675,  however, 
these  friendly  relations  were  disturbed  by  a  southward  move- 
ment of  some  of  the  northern  Indians.  Large  bodies  of  the 
warlike  Senecas,  pressing  upon  the  Susquehannocks  at  the 
head  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay,  were  driving  them  down  into 
Maryland  and  Virginia.  Here  their  indigence  and  their  rest- 
lessness became  a  menace  to  the  whites  and  an  element  of 
disturbance  to  their  relations  with  the  other  tribes,* 

In  the  summer  of  1675  a  party  of  savages  rowed  across  the 
Potomac  river,  committed  several  murders  and  made  good 
their  escape  into  Maryland.^  In  anger  and  alarm  the  planters 
of  Stafford  county  seized  their  arms  to  protect  their  homes 
and  to  avenge  their  neighbors.  A  band  of  thirty  or  more, 
led  by  Colonel  Mason  and  Captain  Brent,  pursued  the  savages 
up  the  Potomac  into  the  Maryland  woods. "^  Coming  in  the 
early  dawn  upon  two  diverging  trails,  "each  leader  with  his 
party  took  a  separate  path".  'Tn  less  than  a  furlong  either 
found  a  cabin",  one  crowded  with  Doeg  Indians,  the  other 
with  Susquehannocks.  The  king  of  the  Doegs,  when  he  saw 
his  hut  surrounded  by  Brent's  men,  "came  trembling  forth, 

'Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  165;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-71. 

*Hen.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  323,  380.  "Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  141. 

*T.  M.,  p.  9;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  pp.  165,  167. 

•T.  M.,  p.  9;   P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-370;   COi-36-36;  COi-36-37. 

•T.  M.,  p.  8;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  165. 

146 


BACON'S  REBELLION  147 

and  wou'd  have  fled".  But  Captain  Brent,  "catching  hold  of 
his  twisted  lock,  which  was  all  the  hair  he  wore",  commanded 
him  to  deliver  up  the  men  guilty  of  the  recent  murders.  "The 
king  pleaded  ignorance  and  slipt  loos",  whereupon  Brent  shot 
him  dead.  At  this  the  savages  in  the  cabin  opened  fire,  and 
the  Virginians  answered  with  a  deadly  volley.  "Th'  Indians 
throng'd  out  at  the  door  and  fled."  "The  English  shot  as 
many  as  they  cou'd,  so  that  they  killed  ten  .  .  .  and  brought 
away  the  kings  son."  "The  noise  of  this  shooting  awaken'd 
th'  Indians  in  the  cabin  which  Coll.  Mason  had  encompassed, 
who  likewise  rush'd  out  and  fled,  of  whom  his  company  shot 
ffourteen."'' 

This  unfortunate  affair  was  the  beginning  of  a  deadly  war 
between  the  English  and  the  Indians,  which  brought  untold 
suffering  upon  the  people  of  Maryland  and  Virginia.  The 
Susquehannocks,  enraged  at  the  slaughter  of  their  warriors, 
became  the  most  implacable  enemies  of  the  white  men.  Join- 
ing with  the  other  tribes  in  a  league  against  the  English,  they 
began  a  series  of  outrages  and  murders  which  continued  many 
months,  and  cost  the  lives  of  hundreds  of  men,  women  and 
children.  During  the  year  1676  alone,  more  i>eople  were 
butchered  in  Virginia  by  the  savages  than  fell  in  the  massacre 
of  1644.^  This  fearful  mortality  was  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  Indians  were  now  supplied  with  firearms.  Governor  Ber- 
keley and  his  friends,  in  their  greed  to  secure  the  valuable 
beaver  and  otter  skins,  had  not  hesitated  to  purchase  them 
with  powder,  shot  and  guns.^  The  savages  had  now  almost 
entirely  discarded  the  bow  and  arrow,  and  were  so  skilful  with 
their  new  weapons  that  the  English  often  hired  them  "to  kill 
Deare".^^  So  that  when  the  war  cry  was  once  more  heard 
upon  the  frontier,  the  savages,  although  less  numerous  than 
in  the  days  of  Powhatan  or  Opechancanough,  were  far  more 
to  be  feared. 

It  was  Maryland  that  first  felt  the  resentment  of  the  savages. 

'T.  M.,  pp.  8-9;  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-370;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  165. 
•P.  R.  O.,  CO1-39-10;  COi-36-78;  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  10. 
•W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  6;  T.  M.,  p.  11. 
"  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  6. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  149 

The  people  of  this  province  had  taken  no  part  in  the  attack  of 
Mason  and  Brent,  but  the  Susquehannocks  were  not  in  the 
humor  to  make  nice  distinctions.  In  seeking  revenge  for 
the  murder  of  their  braves  they  held  all  whites  equally  guilty, 
and  fell  immediately  upon  the  nearest  plantations.  Thus  were 
the  Marylanders  made  to  suffer  for  the  rashness  of  the 
Virginia  frontiersmen. 

Feeling  that  it  was  his  duty  to  aid  the  neighboring  province 
in  this  war  brought  on  by  the  hasty  action  of  two  of  his  own 
officers,  and  fearing  that  depredations  upon  the  Virginia, 
frontiers  could  not  long  be  prevented,  Sir  William  Berkeley 
decided  to  join  Governor  Calvert  in  a  vigorous  attack  upon 
the  savages.  Colonel  John  Washington,  great-grandfather 
of  George  Washington,  at  the  head  of  several  hundred  men, 
was  despatched  across  the  Potomac  to  effect  a  junction  with 
the  Maryland  troops. ^^  The  combined  forces  of  the  two  colon- 
ies are  said  to  have  numbered  "neer  a  thousand  men".^^ 

Unable  to  withstand  this  army  in  the  open  field,  the  Indians 
fell  back  upon  a  fort  which  they  had  erected  upon  the  north 
bank  of  the  Potomac,  and  here  awaited  the  approach  of  the 
English.  Their  fortress  had  been  constructed  with  such  care 
and  skill  that  the  white  men  were  unable  to  carry  it  by  storm. 
The  outer  works  consisted  of  lines  of  tree  trunks,  from  five 
to  eight  inches  in  diameter,  "watled  6  inches  apart  to  shoot 
through",  their  tops  firmly  twisted  together.  Behind  this  was 
a  ditch,  and  within  all  a  square  citadel,  with  high  walls  and 
"fflankers  having  many  loop-holes".  The  fire  of  the  red-skins 
from  behind  these  works  proved  so  deadly  that  hopes  of  a  suc- 
cessful assault  had  to  be  abandoned.  Nor  could  breaches  be 
effected,  for  the  allies  were  not  provided  with  heavy  guns. 
The  moist  and  swampy  ground  surrounding  the  fort  made  it 
impossible  to  approach  by  means  of  trenches. ^^ 

So  the  English  cast  their  camp  before  the  fort  hoping  to 
starve  out  the  enemy.  Lines  were  drawn  about  the  place,  as 
closely  as  the  nature  of  the  ground  would  permit,  while  boats 

"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  165;  P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-78. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-369;  T.  M.,  p.  9. 
"T.  M.,  p.  10. 


ISO  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

patrolled  the  river  to  cut  off  escape  to  the  Virginia  shore. 
Fearing,  no  doubt,  that  lack  of  provisions  would  soon  make  it 
necessary  for  them  to  come  to  terms  with  the  besiegers,  the 
Indians  sent  out  several  of  their  leaders  to  treat  for  peace. 
But  so  deep  was  the  animosity  aroused  by  the  recent  murders, 
that  the  white  men  violated  the  flag  of  truce  by  detaining 
these  envoys,  and  finally  beating  out  their  brains.-^*  This 
flagrant  act  aroused  the  Indians  to  a  desperate  defense.  In 
numerous  sallies  they  inflicted  severe  loss  upon  the  besiegers, 
and  captured  enough  horses  to  supply  themselves  with  food. 
At  last,  after  six  or  seven  weeks  of  fighting,  they  resolved 
to  effect  their  escape.  On  a  dark  night,  when  the  English  were 
least  expecting  it,  they  sallied  forth,  bringing  with  them  their 
women  and  children.  Awakening  the  white  men  with  their 
savage  yells,  they  burst  in  among  them,  killing  and  wounding 
many,  and  before  resistance  could  be  made,  were  through 
the  lines  and  gone.^^ 

And  now  the  Virginians  were  made  to  pay  dearly  for  their 
part  in  this  ill-managed  affair.  Early  in  January,  1676,  the 
Susquehannocks  crossed  the  Potomac  and  came  plundering 
and  murdering  through  the  frontier  counties.  ^•^  Separating 
into  small  bands,  the  Indians  fell  upon  the  more  isolated  plan- 
tations, and  in  a  few  days  had  killed  no  less  than  thirty-six  per- 
sons. Those  whose  wretched  fate  it  was  to  be  captured,  were 
put  to  death  with  all  the  tortures  that  devilish  ingenuity  could 
devise.  Some  were  roasted,  others  flayed  alive.  The  suffer- 
ings of  the  victims  were  long  and  protracted,  while  the  sav- 
ages knocked  out  their  teeth  or  tore  off  their  nails  or  stuck 
feathers  and  lighted  wood  into  their  flesh, ^''" 

In  terror  the  people  of  the  frontier  began  to  desert  their 
homes,   seeking  shelter  in  the  more  populous  settlements.^^ 

"T.  M.,  p.  9;  P.  R.  O.,  CO392.1-173,  178;  Cotton,  p.  3;  Inds'  Pros. 
p.  5;  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-370. 

""P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-78;  CO5-1371-369;  T.  M.,  pp.  9-10;  Inds'  Pros., 
pp.  7-8;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  165. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-370. 

"Inds'  Pros.,  p.  7;  P.  R.  O.,  COs-i37i-37o;  COi-36-66;  Mass.  S.  IV, 
Vol.  IX,  p.  176. 

"W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  7. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  151 

In  a  few  weeks  one  parish,  upon  the  upper  waters  of  the  Rap- 
pahannock, was  reduced  from  seventy-one  plantations  to 
eleven.^^  Those  that  remained  were  concentrated  upon  the 
largest  farms,  which  they  fortified  with  palisades  and 
redoubts.^^ 

When  the  news  of  these  atrocities  reached  Sir  William  Ber- 
keley, hasty  preparations  were  made  for  an  expedition  against 
the  invaders.  Sir  Henry  Chicheley  was  put  at  the  head  of 
forces  of  horse  and  foot,  with  orders  to  give  immediate  pursuit 
to  the  savages.  But  just  as  all  was  in  readiness  and  the  com- 
mand to  march  hourly  expected,  the  Governor  decided  that 
the  expedition  should  be  abandoned.  Chicheley's  commis- 
sion was  annulled,  his  forces  disbanded  and  the  soldiers  sent 
to  their  homes.^^ 

What  induced  Berkeley  to  take  this  strange  step  none  could 
tell.  The  murders  of  the  savages  were  continuing.  The 
frontier  was  defenseless.  Messages  were  coming  from  the 
exposed  plantations  imploring  aid.  Why  should  he  desert 
the  people  and  expose  them  to  the  fury  of  the  Indians?  It  is 
possible  that  he  detected  symptoms  of  mutiny  among  the 
troops  and  thought  it  better  to  abandon  the  expedition  than 
to  run  the  risk  of  a  rebellion.  He  was  well  aware  of  the 
discontent  of  the  people,  and  his  letters  to  England  show  that 
he  dreaded  an  insurrection.^^  The  unhappy  planters  ascribed 
the  Governor's  strange  conduct  to  avarice.  He  and  his  friends 
had  a  monopoly  of  the  Indian  trade,  and  it  was  hinted  that  he 
preferred  to  allow  the  atrocities  to  continue  rather  than  destroy 
his  source  of  revenue.  He  was  determined,  was  the  cry, 
"that  no  bullits  would  pierce  beaver  skins". ^^  More  probable 
seems  the  explanation  that  Berkeley  hoped  to  prevent  further 
depredations  by  the  help  of  the  Pamunkeys  and  other  friendly 
tribes,  and  feared  that  an  invasion  of  the  Indian  lands  might 
defeat  this  purpose.^^ 

But  an  Assembly  was  summoned  in  March  and  instructed 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-372;  Vq.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  35. 

»T.  M.,  p.  10.  "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-373,  411. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-30-S1 ;  CO  I -36-37. 

"T.  M.,  p.  11;  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  7;  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-375. 

**P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -36-36. 


152  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

by  the  Governor  to  take  immediate  measures  to  secure  the 
frontier.2^  Acting,  no  doubt,  under  Berkeley's  influence,  the 
Assembly  resolved  not  to  carry  the  conflict  into  the  enemy's 
territory,  but  to  wage  a  defensive  war.  Forts  were  to  be 
erected  upon  the  upper  waters  of  the  great  rivers,  and  manned 
with  regular  troops  as  a  protection  to  the  outer  plantations. 
To  defray  the  cost,  new  and  heavy  taxes  were  put  upon  the 
people.^^ 

This  last  act  of  the  Long  Assembly  caused  bitter  dissatis- 
faction. The  border  counties  had  hoped  that  provision  would 
be  made  for  an  expedition  against  the  Indians.  No  headway 
could  be  made  unless  the  whites  took  the  offensive  and  hunted 
down  the  savages  in  their  own  villages.  The  erection  of  forts 
was  useless.^''^  The  Indians  would  experience  no  difiiculty 
in  avoiding  them  in  their  murderous  raids.  They  could  ap- 
proach the  remote  plantations,  or  even  those  far  within  the 
frontiers,  without  fear  of  detection  by  the  soldiers,  for  the 
numerous  swamps  and  dense  woods  afforded  them  ample 
covert.  It  was  not  intended  that  the  forts  should  be  used  as 
bases  for  expeditions  into  the  enemy's  country;  nor  could  the 
soldiers  leave  them  to  pursue  and  punish  the  plundering 
savages.  What  then,  it  was  asked,  could  be  the  value  of 
fortresses,  if  they  were  to  defend  only  the  ground  upon  which 
they  stood?-* 

The  event  proved  the  people  right.  The  forts,  when  built, 
were  but  slight  obstacles  to  the  invasions  of  the  Indians.  The 
murders  became  more  frequent  than  before.  The  impotency 
of  the  defenses  of  the  colony  seems  to  have  inspired  them  to 
more  terrible  and  vigorous  attacks.  The  cry  against  the  forts 
became  more  bitter.  "It  was  a  design,"  the  people  thought, 
"of  the  grandees  to  engross  all  their  tobacco  into  their  own 
hands". ^^  As  the  cries  of  their  women  and  children  grew 
more  piteous  and  distressing,  the  men  of  the  frontier  spoke 
openly  of  disobedience.     Rather  than  pay  the  taxes  for  the 

'•Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p  165;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  326. 

"F.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-373;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  327-329- 

"  Inds'  Pros.,  pp.  8,  9. 

*«P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-378.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-374. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  iS3 

accursed  forts  they  would  plant  no  more  tobacco.  If  the 
Governor  would  not  send  an  expedition  against  the  Indians, 
they  themselves  would  march  out  to  avenge  their  wrongs. 
The  forts  must  be  dismantled,  the  garrisons  dismissed.^*^ 

From  all  parts  of  the  colony  came  the  insistent  demand 
that  the  Assembly,  which  had  so  long  been  but  a  mockery  of 
representative  government,  should  be  dissolved  and  the  people 
given  a  free  election. ^^  But  Berkeley  was  not  the  man  to 
yield  readily  to  this  clamor.  Never,  in  all  the  long  years  that 
he  had  ruled  over  Virginia,  had  he  allowed  the  rabble  to 
dictate  his  policies.  He  would  not  do  so  now.  When  peti- 
tions came  from  the  frontiersmen,  asking  leave  to  go  out 
against  the  Indians,  he  returned  a  brusk  and  angry  refusal. ^^ 
A  delegation  from  Charles  City  county  met  with  a  typical 
reception  from  the  irritable  old  man.  As  they  stood  humbly 
before  him,  presenting  their  request  for  a  commission,  they 
spoke  of  themselves  as  the  Governor's  subjects.  Upon  this 
Berkeley  blurted  out  that  they  were  all  "fools  and  logger- 
heads". They  were  subjects  of  the  King,  and  so  was  he.  He 
would  grant  them  no  commission,  and  bade  them  be  gone, 
and  a  pox  take  them.^^  Later  he  issued  a  proclamation  for- 
bidding under  heavy  penalties  all  such  petitions.^* 

Unfortunately,  at  this  juncture  came  news  that  large  bodies 
of  Indians  were  descending  upon  the  upper  waters  of  the 
James,  and  that  another  bloody  assault  might  soon  be  ex- 
pected. ^^  In  terror  and  anger  the  people  of  Charles  City 
county  seized  their  arms,  determined  to  repel  this  threatened 
storm,  with  or  without  the  Governor's  permission.  Parties 
went  about  from  place  to  place  beating  up  volunteers  with  the 
drum.  The  magistrates  were  either  in  sympathy  with  the 
movement,  or  were  unable  to  prevent  it.^^  Soon  a  consider- 
able body  of  rough,  determined  men  were  assembled,  awaiting 
only  a  leader  to  march  out  against  the  enemy. 

This  leader  they  found  in  one  of  the  most  interesting  and 

T.  R.  O.,  CO5-137X-378;  Inds'  Pros.,  p.  8. 

«P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-379;  CO1-37-17. 

=^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-375.  '"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-40-106. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-375.  ""Ibid. 

-Ibid. 


154  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

picturesque  characters  in  Virginia  history.  Nathaniel  Bacon 
is  depicted  as  twenty-nine  years  of  age,  black-haired,  of 
medium  height  and  slender,  melancholy,  pensive,  and  taciturn. 
In  conversation  he  was  logical  and  convincing;  in  oratory 
magnetic  and  masterful. ^^  His  successful  expeditions  against 
the  Indians  and  the  swift  blows  he  directed  against  the  loyal 
forces  mark  him  as  a  military  commander  of  no  mean 
ability.^® 

Bacon  was  almost  a  stranger  in  Virginia,  for  he  had  left 
England  less  than  two  years  before.^®  He  was  fortunate, 
however,  in  having  a  cousin,  also  named  Nathaniel  Bacon, 
high  in  the  favor  of  Sir  William  Berkeley.^^  It  was  doubtless 
through  the  influence  of  this  relative  that  the  young  man  at- 
tained a  position  of  great  influence,  and  was  appointed  to  the 
Council  itself. ^^  But  submission  to  the  will  of  the  imperious 
Governor  was  the  price  paid  by  all  that  wished  to  remain  long 
in  favor  in  Virginia.  Bacon  did  not  approve  of  Berkeley's 
arbitrary  government;  he  disliked  the  long  continuation  of 
the  Assembly,  the  unjust  discriminations,  the  unusual  taxes, 
the  incapacity  of  officials;  and  it  was  not  in  his  fiery  temper 
to  conceal  his  opinions.  Soon,  it  would  seem,  the  frowns  of 
the  Governor  began  to  fall  upon  him,  and  he  grew  weary  of 
coming  to  Council. ^^ 

Bacon  had  made  his  home  in  Henrico,  at  that  time  one  of 
the  extreme  frontier  counties.  His  marked  ability,  his  liberal 
education,  his  place  in  the  Council  soon  gave  him  a  position 
of  great  influence  among  his  rough  but  hardy  neighbors. 
None  could  be  better  suited  to  assume  command  over  the 
desperate  volunteers  that  had  gathered  in  Charles  City 
county. 

But  it  was  a  very  serious  step  to  accept  the  leadership  of 
this  band  which  had  taken  arms  in  defiance  of  the  Governor's 
commands.  It  would  expose  him  to  the  charge  not  only  of 
disobedience,  but  of  open  rebellion.     Bacon,  however,  like  all 

"Bac's   Pros.,  p.  9.  ="  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-376. 

"Cotton,  p.  4;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX.  p.  180;  P.  R.  O.,  COr-37-i. 
«Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  125-129.        "P.    R.   O.,   C05-i37i-375. 
"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  134-135. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  ISS 

that  dwelt  upon  the  frontiers,  was  angered  at  the  inadequate 
protection  given  by  the  government.  When  news  came  to 
him  that  depredations  had  been  committed  upon  one  of  his 
own  plantations,  and  that  his  overseer  had  been  killed,  he 
was  eager  to  take  revenge. ^^ 

Now  some  of  Bacon's  friends,  as  anxious  as  he  for  an 
Indian  expedition,  and  thinking  him  most  proper  to  con- 
duct it,  suggested  his  name  to  the  volunteers.  The  men  were 
quite  willing  to  accept  so  influential  a  commander,  but  it  was 
not  so  easy  to  persuade  Bacon  to  take  the  dangerous  place. 
He  consented,  however,  to  row  across  the  river,  and  visit  the 
soldiers  in  their  camp.  Here  the  men  gathered  around  him, 
and  with  joyous  shouts  of,  "A  Bacon !  A  Bacon !"  proclaimed 
him  their  leader.  His  friends  pressed  him  to  accept.  They 
would,  they  said,  accompany  him  on  his  expedition.  If  the 
Governor  ordered  them  to  disband,  they  would  defy  him. 
"They  drank  damnation  to  their  souls",  if  they  should  prove 
untrue  to  him.  Touched  by  these  proofs  of  confidence,  and 
fired  perhaps  with  ambition,  the  young  man  yielded,  and 
Bacon's  Rebellion  had  begun.*^ 

From  the  very  first  the  movement  assumed  the  character  of 
an  insurrection.^'  Amid  the  hearty  applause  of  his  rough  fol- 
lowers. Bacon  spoke  of  the  negligence,  the  incapacity  and 
wickedness  of  the  government.  Their  betrayal  into  the  hands 
of  the  savages  was  but  one  of  many  grievances.  The  laws 
were  unjust,  the  taxes  oppressive.  Something  must  be  done 
to  redress  these  wrongs  and  to  end  misgovernment.^*'  And  as 
the  poor  people  flocked  in  to  him,  he  listed  their  names  in  a 
huge  round-robin  and  bound  them  to  him  by  an  oath  of 
fidelity.*^ 

A  message  was  dispatched  to  the  Grovernor  to  request  a 
commission  authorizing  the  expedition  against  the  Indians.^* 

^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-376;  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  pp.  4,  7. 
"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-376. 
«P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-54;  COi-36-37;  CO1-37-1. 

^'P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-376,  7;  COi-36-54;  COi-37-i;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol. 
IX,  p.  166. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-376,  7. 
**W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  7;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  166. 


156  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

But  Bacon  promised  his  men  that  if  Sir  WilHam  withheld  his 
assent,  he  would  lead  them  forth  without  it ;  and  in  the  mean- 
while, without  waiting  for  the  Governor's  reply,  he  crossed 
over  into  New  Kent,  "a.  county  ripe  for  rebellion",  where  he 
expected  to  strengthen  his  position  and  perhaps  attack  the 
Pamunkeys.^^  This  nation  had  for  many  years  been  friendly 
to  the  English,  and  had  more  than  once  given  them  invaluable 
assistance  against  other  Indian  tribes.  Their  present  queen 
was  the  widow  of  Tottopottomoi,  who  had  been  killed  while 
fighting  as  the  ally  of  the  white  men  against  the  Richahec- 
rians.^*^  They  now  occupied  land  allotted  them  by  the  Assem- 
bly, upon  the  frontier  of  New  Kent,  where,  it  was  supposed, 
they  would  act  as  a  protection  to  the  colony  against  the  raids 
of  hostile  tribes.^ ^  When  the  Susquehannocks  began  their 
depredations  Governor  Berkeley  expected  valuable  assistance 
from  these  allies,  whom  he  termed  his  "spyes  and  intelli- 
gence" to  search  out  "the  bloody  enimies".^^  But  the  Pamun- 
keys  not  only  failed  to  check  the  invasion  of  the  Susquehan- 
nocks, but  seem  to  have  joined  with  them  in  the  work  of 
bloodshed  and  pillage.  The  people  of  the  frontier  believed 
that  almost  all  the  Indians  were  leagued  together  for  their 
ruin.  The  Pamunkeys,  they  were  sure,  had  taken  part  in  the 
recent  atrocities.  And  as  they  were  their  close  neighbors, 
knowing  all  their  customs  and  all  their  habitations,  they  were 
especially  fitted  for  the  work  of  destruction.  The  New  Kent 
planters  were  now  impatient  to  march  out  against  them  to  take 
revenge  for  the  recent  horrible  murders.  But  the  Pamunkeys, 
upon  hearing  of  Bacon's  approach,  deserted  their  reservation 
and  took  refuge  in  the  wilderness.^^ 

It  is  not  hard  to  imagine  the  Governor's  anger  when  he 
heard  of  these  proceedings.  Despite  the  testimony  of  the 
frontiersmen,  he  had  refused  to  believe  the  Pamunkeys 
guilty,  and  he  still  relied  upon  them  for  assistance  against  the 
Susquehannocks.     Bacon's  proceedings,  in  frightening  them 

**P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-377;  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  4. 
°*Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p  422;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  pp.  104-106;  Force,  Vol.  I,  Tract 
VIII,  p.  14. 
"  Hen.,  Vol.  I,  p.  380.  ''  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  pp.  166,  180. 

"Mass.  S.  IV,  p.  166. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  IS7 

from  their  lands,  upset  all  his  plans  of  defense.  Yet  had  the 
volunteers  contented  themselves  with  attacking  the  Indians,  it 
is  conceivable  that  Berkeley  would  have  yielded.  But  when 
they  took  up  arms  without  his  permission,  put  themselves 
under  the  command  of  a  discontented  Councillor,  and  demanded 
redress  of  grievances  from  the  government,  it  was  necessary 
for  him  to  resort  to  repression.  The  commission  was  refused 
and  a  proclamation  issued  denouncing  Bacon's  conduct  as 
illegal  and  rebellious.  He  and  his  men  were  offered  pardon, 
but  only  on  condition  that  they  lay  down  their  arms,  and  return 
immediately  to  their  obedience."^ 

But  the  mutineers  would  not  obey.  Are  we,  they  com- 
plained, to  return  passively  to  our  homes,  there  to  be  slaugh- 
tered by  the  savage  foe?  The  Grovernor  has  given  us  no 
protection.  The  Indians  are  coming.  Already  the  blood  of  our 
butchered  relatives  cries  aloud  to  Heaven.  We  hope  we  have 
still  enough  English  blood  in  our  veins  to  think  it  more  hon- 
orable to  die  in  fair  battle  with  the  enemy,  than  to  be  sneak- 
ingly  murdered  in  our  beds.  If  we  lie  still,  we  are  destroyed  . 
by  the  heathen ;  if  we  defend  ourselves,  we  are  accounted  rebels  ' 
and  traitors.  But  we  will  fight.  And  if  we  must  be  hanged  for 
killing  those  that  will  destroy  us,  let  them  hang  us,  we  will 
venture  that  rather  than  lie  at  the  mercy  of  our  barbarous 
enemies.  So,  turning  their  backs  upon  the  plantations,  they 
struck  out  into  the  dense  woods.^' 

When  Berkeley  heard  that  his  authority  was  still  de- 
fied, and  his  pardon  rejected,  he  was  resolved  at  all  hazards 
to  compel  obedience.  Gathering  around  him  a  party  of 
three  hundred  gentlemen,  "well  armed  and  mounted",  he 
set  out,  on  the  third  of  May,  to  intercept  the  rebels.^ "^  But 
learning,  upon  his  arrival  at  the  falls  of  the  James,  that  Bacon 
had  crossed  the  river  and  was  already  far  away,  he  decided 
to  encamp  in  the  frontier  counties  and  await  his  return.-^ ''^ 

But  he  sent  out  a  party  under  Colonel  Claiborne  to  pursue 
the  Pamunkeys,  and  induce  them,  if  possible,  to  return  to  their 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-377;  CO1-36-S5;  CO1-37-1. 
""P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-377;  COi-36-66;  CO1-37-14. 
"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  167.  "P.   R.  O.,   CO5-1371-377. 


158  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUAIRTS 

reservation.  The  savages  were  found  entrenched  in  a  strong 
position,  "encompassed  with  trees  which  they  had  fallen  in  the- 
branch  of  an  Impassable  swamp".^^  Their  queen  refused  to 
abandon  this  retreat,  declaring  that  since  the  Governor  had 
not  been  able  to  command  the  obedience  of  Bacon,  he  could  not 
save  her  people  from  his  violence.  But  she  promised  that  the 
Pamunkeys  should  remain  peaceable  and  should  take  no  part 
in  the  raids  of  the  Susquehannocks.  "Of  this  the  Governor 
was  informed,  who  resolved  not  to  be  soe  answered  but  to 
reduce  her  and  the  other  Indians,  soe  soone  as  Bacon  could 
be  brought  to  submit.  "^^ 

On  May  the  tenth  Berkeley  issued  a  new  proclamation. 
The  taking  of  arms  by  Bacon,  he  said,  against  his  wishes  and 
commands,  was  an  act  of  disloyalty  and  rebellion.  If  per- 
mitted to  go  unpunished,  it  would  tend  to  the  ruin  and  over- 
throw of  all  government  in  the  colony.  It  was  his  duty  to  use 
all  the  forces  at  his  command  to  suppress  so  dangerous  a 
mutiny.  Should  the  misguided  people  desert  their  leader,  and 
return  to  their  allegiance,  he  would  grant  a  free  and  full  par- 
don. And  as  Nathaniel  Bacon  had  shown  himself  by  his 
rash  proceedings  utterly  unworthy  of  public  trust,  he  sus- 
pended him  from  the  Council  and  from  all  other  offices  held 
by  him.  It  was  amazing,  he  said,|that  after  he  had  been  Gov- 
ernor of  Virginia  so  many  years,  and  had  done  always  equal 
justice  to  all  men,  the  people  should  be  seduced  ^nd  carried 
away  by  so  young  and  turbulent  a  person  as  Bacon J° 

But  although  Berkeley  was  determined  to  suppress  the  rebels 
by  force  of  arms,  the  attitude  of  the  commons  in  other  parts 
of  the  colony  became  so  threatening  that  he  was  forced  to 
make  some  concessions.  To  the  great  joy  of  the  people  he 
dissolved  the  unpopular  Long  Assembly,  and  ordered  a  new 
election.  It  was  with  sorrow,  he  declared,  that  he  departed 
with  the  present  Burgesses,  who  had  given  frequent  proof  of 
ability  and  wisdom.  But  the  complaints  of  many  inhabitants 
of  the  long  continuance  of  the  old  Assembly  had  induced  him 
to  grant  a  free  election.  And  if  any  man  had  grievances  against 

"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  i68.  '"Ibid. 

~P.  R.  O.,  COi-37-i. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  159 

his  government,  or  could  accuse  him  of  injustice  or  bribery, 
he  was  to  present  his  complaint  by  his  Burgesses  to  the  Assem- 
bly, where  it  would  be  examined.®^ 

It  was  indeed  time  for  the  Governor  to  act,  for  the  rebellion 
was  spreading  to  the  older  and  more  populous  counties. ^^  The 
people  there  too  were  denouncing  the  forts,  and  demanding 
redress  of  grievances.  Some  began  to  arm,  and  it  seemed 
not  improbable  that  the  entire  colony  might  soon  be  ablaze. 
Hastening  back  to  his  residence  at  Green  Spring,  he  sought 
to  appease  the  people  by  dismantling  the  obnoxious  forts  and 
dismissing  their  garrisons.®' 

In  the  meanwhile  Bacon  was  making  his  way  through  the 
woods  southward  from  the  falls  of  the  James  in  pursuit  of  the 
Susquehannocks  that  had  committed  the  recent  murders  upon 
the  frontier.®^  These  savages  had  not  attempted  to  return  to 
their  homes  north  of  the  Potomac,  but  had  retired  to  the  coun- 
try of  the  Occaneechees,  where  they  had  entrenched  themselves 
in  two  forts.®^  The  Occaneechees  dwelt  in  the  southernmost 
part  of  Virginia,  near  the  site  of  Clarksville.®"  They  are  de- 
scribed as  a  stout  people,  and  the  most  enterprising  of  traders. 
Their  chief  town,  situated  upon  an  island  in  the  Roanoke 
River  and  defended  by  three  strong  forts,  was  "the  Mart  for 
all  the  Indians  for  att  least  500  miles"  around.®'^  The  beaver 
skins  stored  in  this  place  at  the  time  of  Bacon's  expedition 
are  said  to  have  valued  no  less  than  £1,000.®*  Persicles,  their 
king,  was  reported  to  be  an  enlightened  ruler,  "a  very  brave 
man  &  ever  true  to  ye  English".®® 

It  was  toward  this  island  that  Bacon  led  his  men.  But  a 
quest  for  Indian  allies  took  him  far  out  of  his  route.     Every- 

**  P.  R.  O.,  COi -36-64.  Berkeley's  proclamation,  addressed  to  the  sheriff 
of  Rappahannock  county,  dissolving  the  Assembly,  and  the  proclamation 
denouncing  Bacon  as  a  traitor  were  both  issued  in  Henrico,  on  May 
10,  1676. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-379.  "'P.   R.   O.,   CO5-1371-379,  411. 

•*W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  i;  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  180;  P.  R.  O., 
COi-36-77;  CO1-37-16. 

"  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  180.  *«  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  XI,  p.  121. 

'"  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  167.  «*  Ibid. 

•"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16;  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  182. 


i6o  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

where  he  found  the  savages  reluctant  to  aid  him,  even  those 
nations  that  had  formerly  been  most  friendly  to  the  English 
now  holding  aloof  from  them.  This  embarrassed  him  greatly 
for  he  had  relied  upon  receiving  aid  from  several  tribes,  and 
his  food  was  not  sufficient  for  a  long  march.  As  the  little 
army  went  further  and  further  into  the  wilderness,  they  began 
to  face  the  possibility  of  starvation.  When  at  last  they  ap- 
proached the  Occaneechee  country  and  received  promises  of 
aid  from  Persicles,  their  provisions  were  nearly  exhausted. ''^^ 

Upon  reaching  the  Roanoke  the  English  crossed  the  north 
branch  of  the  river  and  encamped  upon  the  Occaneechee 
island. '^^  To  his  deep  satisfaction,  Bacon  found  Persicles  em- 
broiled with  the  Susquehannocks,  and  already  preparing  for 
their  destruction.  When  these  wanderers  from  the  north  first 
came  to  him,  Persicles  had  received  them  with  kindness  and 
had  relieved  their  needs.  But  they,  "being  exercised  in  warr 
for  many  years  with  the  Senecaes,  and  living  on  rapin,  en- 
deavoured to  beat  the  Ockinagees  of  their  own  Island". '^^ 
Persicles  had  defeated  them,  however,  and  forced  them  to  take 
refuge  in  their  two  forts.''^^ 

Now  the  Susquehannocks,  in  their  southward  march,  had 
subdued  and  brought  with  them  some  members  of  the  Manna- 
kin  and  Annelecton  tribes.''^*  These  savages,  although  they 
lived  with  their  conquerors,  had  no  love  for  them,  and  were 
quite  willing  to  join  in  any  plan  for  their  destruction.  Per- 
sicles, it  would  seem,  was  platting  with  them  to  surprise  and 
cut  off  the  Susquehannocks,  when  Bacon  appeared  with  his 
men.  Fearing,  no  doubt,  that  the  participation  of  the  English 
in  the  attack  would  render  secrecy  impossible,  Persicles  left 
them  on  the  island,  and  went  out  alone  against  the  enemy.'^^ 
The  Mannakins  and  Annelectons  proved  true  to  their  allies  and 
the  Susquehannocks  were  easily  defeated.  Persicles  returned 
in  triumph,  bringing  with  him  several  prisoners.     These  he 

™P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-77.  "Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  181. 

"  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  I,  p.  167.  "  Ibid. 

'*Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  181;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16;  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol. 
IX,  p.  2. 
"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  i6i 

wished  the  EngHsh  to  execute,  but  they  "refused  to 
take  that  office". '^^  Thereupon  he  himself  put  them  to  death 
with  all  the  usual  Indian  tortures,  "running  fyer  brands  up 
their  bodys  &  the  like".'^^ 

But  now  the  friendship  of  Persicles  and  the  English  came 
abruptly  to  an  end.  The  Berkeley  party  afterwards  claimed 
that  Bacon  deliberately  picked  a  quarrel  with  his  allies,  and 
attacked  them  without  provocation.'^^  It  would  be  unjust, 
however,  to  place  too  much  confidence  in  these  charges. 
Bacon's  men  found  themselves  in  a  most  critical  situation. 
They  were  many  miles  from  the  plantations,  surrounded  by 
the  savages,  their  provisions  exhausted.  Persicles,  they  as- 
serted, had  failed  to  keep  his  promise  to  supply  them  with 
food.  He  was  assuming  a  threatening  posture,  manning  his 
forts,  and  lining  the  river  bank  with  his  warriors.  For  Bacon 
to  retreat  from  the  island  under  these  circumstances,  would 
have  exposed  his  company  to  destruction.  To  remain  passive 
was  to  starve."^ 

As  the  English  became  more  insistent  in  their  demands  for 
food,  Persicles  retired  to  one  of  his  forts,  and  refused  further 
conference.  Many  of  the  savages,  seeing  hostilities  imminent, 
deserted  their  cabins  and  began  to  rush  in  through  the  en- 
trances of  their  fortresses.  But  Bacon  interposed  his  men, 
and  succeeded  in  shutting  out  many  of  them.***  Now  from  the 
Indians  across  the  river  came  a  shot,  and  one  of  the  English 
fell  dead.^^  Instantly  Bacon  ordered  a  general  attack.  The 
defenseless  men,  women  and  children  left  in  the  cabins  were 
mercilessly  butchered.  At  the  same  time  fire  was  opened 
upon  the  forts.  The  soldiers  rushed  up  to  the  portholes,  and 
poured  their  volleys  directly  in  upon  the  wretched  savages.^- 
A  hideous  din  arose.  The  singing  and  howling  of  the  war- 
riors was  mingled  with  the  moans  of  the  dying.  Fire  was  set 
to  one  of  the  forts,  in  which  were  the  king's  wife  and  children. 
As  the  flames  arose,  three  or  four  braves  made  a  dash  for 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -36-77. 

"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  167;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16;  COi-36-77. 
"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  167.  "P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-77. 

"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  168.  "^  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16. 

"W.  &  M.  Q,  Vol.  IX,  p.  7. 


i62  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

safety  through  the  Hne  of  the  EngHsh.  All  others  in  this 
fort,  including  the  king's  family,  perished  amid  the  burning 
timbers.®^ 

The  next  day  the  fight  was  continued  from  morn  till  night. 
Several  times  the  savages  sallied  forth  from  their  remaining 
forts,  and  placing  themselves  behind  trees,  opened  fire  upon 
the  English.  But  Bacon's  frontiersmen  were  accustomed  to 
this  method  of  warfare.  So  well  were  they  posted  and  so 
cleverly  concealed,  that  most  of  the  enemy  were  picked  off 
as  they  stood.  At  last  Persicles  himself  led  forth  a  party  of 
about  twenty  men  in  a  desperate  attack  upon  his  enemy. 
With  great  bravery  they  rushed  around  the  English  in  a  wide 
circle,  howling  and  firing.  But  they  too  were  unsuccessful. 
Persicles  was  killed.  Several  of  his  men  were  shot  on  the 
bank  of  the  river,  and  fell  into  the  water.  Of  all  this  party 
seven  only  were  seen  to  escape.^^ 

It  now  seemed  hopeless  for  the  Indians  to  fight  further. 
With  their  king  and  many  of  their  warriors  dead,  and  with 
one  of  their  forts  in  ruins,  their  ultimate  destruction  was 
certain  if  they  remained  upon  the  island.  So,  with  their  women 
and  children,  they  deserted  the  remaining  forts  and  escaped. 
How  they  managed  to  slip  past  the  victorious  white  men  and 
make  their  way  across  the  river  is  not  explained.  Thinking 
it  best  not  to  follow,  Bacon  secured  his  plunder,  and  turned 
his  face  back  towards  the  plantations.^^ 

The  news  of  the  victory  over  the  savages  was  received  with 
enthusiasm  in  the  frontier  counties.  Bacon  had  been  popular 
with  the  people  before;  he  now  became  their  idol.^^  He  and 
his  men,  upon  their  return,  found  the  entire  colony  deeply 
interested  in  the  election  of  a  new  House  of  Burgesses.  In 
various  places  popular  candidates,  men  in  sympathy  with 
Bacon,  were  being  nominated. ^''^  In  Henrico  county  the  peo- 
ple showed  their  contempt  for  the  Governor's  proclamations  by 
electing  Bacon  himself.®^ 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-77.  "W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  7. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-36-77;  COi -36-16;  T.  M.,  p.  II. 
"W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  5.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-379. 

"Bac's  Pros.,  p.  11 ;  T.  M.,  p.  12. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  163 

But  it  would  be  a  matter  of  no  little  risk  for  him  to  go  to 
Jamestown  to  take  his  seat  in  the  Assembly.  While  surrounded 
by  his  loyal  frontiersmen  in  his  own  county  he  might  well 
ignore  the  proclamations  against  him,  but  if  he  put  himself 
in  the  Governor's  power,  that  fiery  old  man  might  not  hesi- 
tate to  hang  him  as  a  rebel.  His  friends  would  not  allow  him 
to  go  unprotected,  and  insisted  upon  sending  with  him  a 
guard  of  forty  or  fifty  armed  men.*®  Embarking  with  this 
company  in  a  sloop,  Bacon  wended  his  way  down  the  crooked 
James  to  the  capital.  He  cast  anchor  a  short  distance  above 
the  town  and  sent  to  the  Governor  to  know  whether  he  would 
be  allowed  to  take  his  seat  in  the  Assembly  without  molesta- 
tion.^" For  reply  Sir  William  opened  fire  upon  the  sloop  with 
the  guns  of  the  fort.®^  Whereupon  Bacon  sailed  further  up 
the  river  out  of  danger.^^  But  that  night  he  landed  with 
twenty  of  his  men,  and  unobserved  by  any,  slipped  silently 
into  town.®^ 

In  the  place  resided  Richard  Lawrence  and  William  Drum- 
mond,  both  deeply  impressed  with  the  need  of  reform  in 
Virginia,  and  both  in  sympathy  with  Bacon's  movement.  Re- 
pairing to  Lawrence's  house.  Bacon  conferred  with  these  two 
friends  for  several  hours. ^*  Upon  reembarking  he  was  dis- 
covered. Alarm  was  immediately  given  in  the  town  and 
several  boats  filled  with  armed  men  pursued  him  up  the  river. 
At  the  same  time  Captain  Gardner,  commanding  the  ship 
Adam  and  Eve,  was  ordered  to  follow  the  fugitives,  and  cap- 
ture or  sink  the  sloop.  For  some  hours  Bacon  eluded  them  all. 
Finally,  however,  about  three  the  next  afternoon,  he  was  driven 
by  the  small  boats  under  the  guns  of  the  Adam  and  Eve,  and 
forced  to  surrender.®^  Coming  on  board  he  was  entrusted  to 
Captain  Gardner  and  Captain  Hubert  Farrill,  and  by  them 
conducted  to  the  Governor.^® 

As  the  prisoner  was  led  before  him,  the  old  man  lifted  his 

"P.   R.   O.,   CO5-1371-369;   CO1-37-16,   17;   Bac's   Pros.,   p.    11;   Mass. 
S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  170. 
-  P.  R.  O..  CO5-1371-379.  ''Ibid. 

"Ibid.  -Ibid. 

■^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-380;  CO1-37-16;  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  170. 
"Ibid.  ''Ibid. 


i64  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

eyes  and  arms  to  Heaven,  exclaiming,  "Now  I  behold  the 
greatest  Rebell  that  ever  was  in  Virginia  1"^''^  After  some 
moments  he  added,  "Mr.  Bacon,  doe  you  continue  to  be  a  gen- 
tleman? And  may  I  take  your  word?  If  so  you  are  at  liberty 
upon  your  parol.  "^*  Later,  when  the  rebel  expressed  gratitude 
at  this  mild  treatment  and  repentance  for  his  disobedience, 
Berkeley  promised  to  grant  him  a  free  pardon.  And  should 
he  offer  a  humble  submission,  he  was  to  be  restored  to  his 
seat  in  the  Council,  and  even  receive  the  long  desired 
commission. ^^ 

In  this  unexpected  leniency  the  Governor  was  probably 
actuated  not  by  magnanimity,  but  by  policy,  or  perhaps  neces- 
sity. When  the  rebel  was  out  upon  his  Indian  expedition.  Sir 
William  had  not  scrupled  to  tell  Mrs.  Bacon  that  he  would 
most  certainly  hang  her  husband,  if  ever  he  got  him  in  his 
power. ^^*^  But  now  he  dared  not  do  so.  Bacon  was  regarded 
by  a  large  part  of  the  people  as  their  leader  in  a  struggle  for 
justice  and  liberty ;  to  treat  him  too  harshly  might  set  the 
entire  colony  ablaze.  In  fact,  many  frontiersmen,  when  they 
heard  of  the  capture  of  their  hero,  did  hasten  down  to  James- 
town with  dreadful  threats  of  revenge  should  a  hair  of  his 
head  be  touched. ^^^  And  throughout  the  colony  the  mutter- 
ings  of  impending  insurrection  were  too  loud  to  be  mistaken 
or  ignored.  ^*^^ 

A  few  days  after  the  capture,  at  a  meeting  of  "Council  and 
Assembly,  the  Governor  arose  from  his  chair,  saying,  "If 
there  be  joy  in  the  presence  of  the  angels  over  one  sinner  that 
repenteth,  there  is  joy  now,  for  we  have  a  penitent  sinner  come 
before  us.  Call  Mr.  Bacon."  Whereupon  the  rebel  entered, 
and  dropping  upon  his  knee,  presented  his  submission.  "God 
forgive  you,"  said  the  Governor,  "I  forgive  you."  "And  all 
that  were  with  him  ?"  asked  one  of  the  Council.  "Yea,"  said 
Sir  William,  "all  that  were  with  him."^"^  That  very  day 
Bacon  was  restored  to  his  seat  in  the  Council.  ^^*    The  soldiers 

•'  COs-1371-380.  ■»  Ibid. 

"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  171;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  543. 
'~W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  5.  "'T.  M.,  p.  15. 

""  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  8.  "*  T.  M.,  pp.  12-13. 

'"P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -37- 16. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  165 

that  had  been  captured  with  him  were  freed  from  their  chains 
and  permitted  to  return  to  their  homes.  ^^^  And,  to  the  great 
joy  of  the  people,  it  was  pubHcly  announced  by  one  of  the 
Burgesses,  that  Bacon  had  been  granted  a  commission  as 
general  in  the  Indian  war.^^^  Feeling  that  all  was  now  well, 
and  that  their  presence  in  Jamestown  was  no  longer  necessary, 
the  sturdy  frontiersmen  shouldered  their  fusils,  and  returned 
to  their  plantations.  ^^^ 

But  the  reconciliation  could  be  but  temporary.  Bacon's  re- 
pentance and  submission  had  been  forced  from  him  while 
helpless  in  the  Governor's  power.  He  did  not  consider  it 
morally  binding.  And  so  long  as  the  people's  grievances 
were  not  righted,  and  the  Indian  war  was  neglected,  he  could 
not  be  content  to  remain  inactive  and  submissive.  On  the 
other  hand.  Sir  William  probably  felt  that  his  promise  of  a 
commission  had  been  exacted  by  the  unlawful  threats  of 
Bacon's  friends,  and  might  be  broken  without  dishonor.^^* 

After  waiting  several  days  for  his  papers.  Bacon  became 
suspicious  of  the  Governor's  intentions,  and  set  out  for  his 
home  in  Henrico.  ^^'^  Berkeley  consented  to  his  departure,  and 
he  took  "civill  leave",  but  immediately  afterwards  he  repented 
bitterly  that  he  had  let  his  enemy  thus  slip  through  his  fingers. 
It  is  probable  that  information  came  to  him  just  too  late,  that 
Bacon  was  again  meditating  resistance.  Parties  of  men  were 
sent  out  upon  the  roads  and  up  the  river  to  intercept  his  flight. 
The  very  beds  of  his  lodging  house  were  searched  in  desperate 
haste,  in  the  hope  that  he  had  not  yet  left  Jamestown.  But  all 
in  vain.  Bacon  had  ridden  quietly  out  of  town,  without 
servants  or  friends,  and  was  now  far  on  his  way  towards  the 
frontier.  ^^^ 

On  his  arrival  at  Henrico,  his  old  comrades  flocked  around 
him,  eager  to  be  led  out  against  the  Indians,  and  confident  in 
the  belief  that  Bacon  was  authorized  to  command  them.  And 
when  they  learned  that  he  had  not  secured  a  commission,  and 
was  once  more  a  fugitive,  they  "sett  their  throats  in  one  com- 

'•"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  170;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16. 

"^  W.  &  M.  Q.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  8. 

""  Ibid.  "*  Ibid. 

^*«W.  &  M.  Q..  Vol.  IX,  p.  9.  "»Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  I,  p.  171. 


i66  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUAIRTS 

mon  key  of  Oathes  and  curses,  and  cried  out  aloud,  that  they 
would  either  have  a  Commission  ...  or  else  they  would  pull 
downe  the  Towne".^^^  And  as  the  news  spread  from  place 
to  place,  rough,  angry  men  came  flocking  in  to  Bacon,  prom- 
ising that  if  he  would  but  lead  them  to  the  Governor,  they 
would  soon  get  him  what  he  pleased.  "Thus  the  raging  tumult 
came  downe  to  Towne."^^^ 

Vague  rumors  began  to  reach  the  Assembly  that  Bacon  was 
marching  on  Jamestown  at  the  head  of  five  hundred  men.^^^ 
By  June  the  twenty-second,  it  became  definitely  known  that  the 
rebels  were  approaching. ^^^  Berkeley  sent  out  several  mes- 
sengers to  demand  their  intentions,  but  could  get  no  satisfac- 
tory reply.  Hasty  preparations  were  made  to  defend  the 
town.^^^  The  neighboring  militia  was  summoned.  Four  guns 
were  dragged  to  Sandy  Bay  to  command  the  narrow  neck 
of  land  that  connected  the  peninsula  with  the  left  bank  of 
the  river."®  It  was  proposed  to  construct  palisades  across 
the  isthmus.  Early  on  the  morning  of  the  23d,  Berkeley  went 
out  himself  to  direct  the  mounting  of  the  guns.^^''^  But  it  was 
too  late.  On  all  sides  the  people  were  crying,  "To  arms!  To 
arms!  Bacon  is  within  two  miles  of  the  town."  The  rebels 
were  threatening,  it  was  reported,  that  if  a  gun  was  fired 
against  them,  they  would  kill  and  destroy  all.^^^  Seeing  that 
resistance  would  be  useless,  and  might  be  fatal,  the  Governor 
ordered  the  guns  to  be  dismounted,  withdrew  his  soldiers,  and 
retired  to  the  state  house. ^^® 

And  so  the  rebels  streamed  unresisted  into  the  town,  a 
motley  crew  of  many  sorts  and  conditions :  Rough,  weather- 
beaten,  determined  frontiersmen,  bent  on  having  the  com- 
mission for  their  leader;  poor  planters,  sunk  deep  in  debt, 
denouncing  the  government  and  demanding  relief  from  their 
taxes;  freedmen  whose  release  from  bondage  had  brought 
them  little  but  hunger  and  nakedness.  Moderation  and  reason 
were  not  to  be  expected  of  such  a  band,  and  it  is  not  strange 

"^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-381.  "^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-3S2. 

»"  Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  171.  "*P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-17. 

»"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16.  "'  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-17. 

"'  Ibid.  ""  Ibid. 
'"  Ibid. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  167 

that  many  of  them  talked  openly  of  overthrowing  the  govern- 
ment and  sharing  the  property  of  the  rich  among  themselves. 
Sixteen  years  of  oppression  and  injustice  were  bearing  their 
natural  fruit — rebellion. ^^*^ 

"Now  tagg,  ragg  &  bobtayle  carry  a  high  hand."^^^  Bacon 
leaves  a  force  to  guard  Sandy  Bay,  stations  parties  at  the 
ferry  and  the  fort,  and  draws  up  his  little  army  before  the 
State-house. ^^^  Two  Councillors  come  out  from  Berkeley  to 
demand  what  he  wants.  Bacon  replies  that  he  has  come  for  a 
commission  as  general  of  volunteers  enrolled  against  the 
Indians.  And  he  protests  that  if  the  Assembly  intends  a 
levy  for  new  forces,  his  men  will  refuse  to  pay  it.  The 
ragged  troops  shout  their  approval  with  cries  of  "Noe  Levies ! 
Noe  Levies  !"^23 

It  is  easy  to  imagine  with  what  anger  the  Governor  drew 
up  and  signed  the  commission.  But  he  dared  not  refuse  it. 
He  was  in  the  power  of  the  rebels,  who  were  already  muttering 
threats  of  bloodshed  and  pillage.  To  defy  them  might  bring 
instant  ruin.^^^  When  the  commission  was  brought  out,  and 
Bacon  had  read  it  to  his  soldiers,  he  refused  to  accept  it, 
declaring  the  powers  granted  insufficient.  Thereupon  he 
drew  up  the  heads  of  a  new  paper,  in  which  his  loyalty  to  the 
king  and  the  legality  of  his  past  actions  were  attested,  and  an 
appointment  given  him  as  general  of  all  the  forces  in  Virginia 
used  in  the  Indian  war.^^^ 

These  new  demands  throw  the  old  Governor  into  an  uncon- 
trollable rage.  He  rushes  out  to  Bacon,  gesticulating  wildly, 
and  declaring  that  rather  than  sign  such  a  paper  he  will  have 
his  hands  cut  off.^^^  In  his  excitement  he  opens  his  bosom, 
crying  out,  "Here,  shoot  me,  fore  God  fair  mark."^^''  Then 
he  offers  to  measure  swords  with  the  rebel  before  all  his  men, 
shouting,  "Let  us  settle  this  difference  singly  between  our- 
selves."^^® But  Bacon  ignores  these  ravings.  "Sir,"  he  says, 
"I  come  not  nor  intend  to  hurt  a  haire  of  your  Honors  head. 

""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16.  ""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-17. 

"*P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16.  17;  T.  M.,  p.  16. 
^^P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-17.  ""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16. 

""Ibid.  '^P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16. 

"^  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-382.  '^  P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -37-16. 


i68  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

And  for  your  sword,  your  Honor  may  please  to  put  it  up,  it 
will  rust  in  the  scabbard  before  ever  I  shall  desire  you  to 
draw  it.  I  come  for  a  commission  against  the  Heathen  who 
daily  inhumanly  murder  us  and  spill  our  bretherens  blood,"^^^ 

In  the  general  distraction  somebody  takes  the  proposals  to 
the  Burgesses,  now  sitting  in  an  upper  chamber  of  the  state 
house.  Bacon  struts  impatiently  below,  muttering  threats  and 
"new  coyned  oathes".^^^  At  a  window  of  the  Assembly  room 
are  a  number  of  faces,  looking  out  on  the  exciting  scenes 
below.  Bacon  calls  up  to  them,  "You  Burgesses,  I  expect  your 
speedy  result."  His  soldiers  shout,  "We  will  have  it,  we  will 
have  it."  At  a  command  from  Bacon  the  rebels  cock  their 
fusils,  and  take  aim  at  the  crowded  window.  "For  God's 
sake  hold  your  hands,"  cry  the  Burgesses,  "forbear  a  little 
and  you  shall  have  what  you  please. "^^^  And  now  there  is 
wild  excitement,  confusion  and  hurrying  to  and  fro.  From 
all  sides  the  Governor  is  pressed  to  grant  the  commission  in 
Bacon's  own  terms.  At  last  he  yields,  and  the  paper  is 
signed. 

But  new  humiliation  awaited  him.  The  next  morning 
Bacon  entered  the  House  of  Burgesses  with  an  armed  guard, 
demanding  that  certain  persons  active  in  obeying  the  Gover- 
nor's orders  should  be  deprived  of  all  offices,  and  that  recent 
letters  to  the  King  denouncing  him  as  a  rebel  should  be  publicly 
contradicted.  When  Berkeley  heard  of  these  demands,  he 
'swore  he  would  rather  suffer  death  than  submit  to  them. 
But  the  Burgesses,  who  thought  it  not  unlikely  that  they  might 
soon  have  their  throats  cut,  advised  him  to  grant  whatever 
was  demanded. ^^2  So  a  letter  was  written  to  the  King,  and 
signed  by  the  Governor,  the  Council  and  the  Burgesses,  ex- 
pressing confidence  in  Bacon's  loyalty  and  justifying  his  past 
actions. ^^^     Several  of  Berkeley's  friends  were  committed  to 

"•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-382.  ^'•P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16. 

'''P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-382.  In  the  various  accounts  left  us  of  these 
scenes  there  is  usually  agreement  upon  the  essential  points.  But  in  details 
and  the  sequence  of  events  there  is  much  discrepancy.  The  author  has 
endeavored  to  present  the  facts  in  accordance  with  the  greatest  weight 
of  evidence. 

'"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-37-16,  17. 

"•P.  R.  O..  COs-1371-383;  CO1-37-15.1. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  169 

prison.  Blank  commissions  for  officers  to  command  under 
Bacon  in  the  Indian  war  were  presented  for  signature.  The 
Governor  granted  all,  "as  long  as  they  concerned  not  life 
and  limb",  being  "willing  to  be  ridd  of  him".  The  Assembly 
finished  its  session,  and  thinking  to  appease  the  rebels,  sent 
their  laws  out  to  be  read  before  them.  But  they  rose  up  like 
a  swarm  of  bees,  and  swore  they  would  have  no  laws.^^*  Yet 
the  legislation  of  this  session  was  exceedingly  liberal.  The 
elections  had  been  held  at  a  time  when  the  people  were  bitterly 
angry  with  the  Governor  and  disgusted  with  the  old  regime. 
In  several  counties  popular  candidates,  men  bent  upon  reform, 
had  been  elected  over  Berkeley's  friends.  ^^^  These  men,  aided 
by  the  menacing  attitude  of  the  people,  had  initiated  a  series 
of  bills  designed  to  restrict  the  Governor's  power  and  to  re- 
store to  the  commons  their  rightful  share  in  local  govern- 
ment. But  it  was  probably  the  presence  of  Bacon  with  his 
ragged  troops  at  Jamestown  that  brought  about  the  final 
passage  of  the  bills.  The  Governor  and  the  Council  would 
hardly  have  given  their  consent,  had  they  not  been  forced  to 
do  so  at  the  sword's  point. 

Indeed  these  laws  aimed  a  telling  blow  at  the  aristocratic 
cliques  that  had  so  long  controlled  all  local  government.  It 
was  to  be  illegal  in  the  future,  for  any  man  to  serve  as  sheriff 
for  two  consecutive  terms. ^^®  Surveyors,  escheators,  clerks 
of  the  court  and  sheriffs  should  hold  only  one  office  at  a 
time.^^'^  The  self-perpetuating  vestries  which  had  long  con- 
trolled the  parishes  and  levied  church  taxes,  were  to  give 
place  to  bodies  elected  tri-annually  by  the  freemen.  ^^^  An  act 
was  passed  restricting  the  power  of  the  county  courts.  For 
the  future  the  people  were  to  elect  representatives,  equal  in 
number  with  the  justices,  to  sit  with  them,  and  have  a  voice 
"in  laying  the  countie  assessments,  and  of  making  whole- 
some lawes".^^^  Councillors  were  no  longer  to  be  exempt 
from  taxation.  The  act  of  1670,  restricting  the  right  to  vote 
for  Burgesses  to  freeholders  was  abolished,  and  the  franchise 

^P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16.  ^»P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-379. 

"•  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  353-  "'  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  354- 

^^'Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  359-  '*' Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  357. 


170  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

extended  to  all  freemen. ^^"  And  since  "the  frequent  false 
returns"  of  elections  had  "caused  great  disturbances",  it  wa's 
enacted  that  any  sheriff  found  guilty  of  this  crime  should  be 
fined  twenty  thousand  pounds  of  tobacco.^**^ 

Hardly  had  the  Assembly  closed  its  session  when  the  news 
was  received  that  the  Indians  were  again  on  the  war-path, 
having  killed  eight  persons  in  the  upper  counties.  This  caused 
great  alarm  in  the  rebel  army,  and  Bacon  found  it  necessary 
the  next  day  to  lead  them  back  to  the  frontier  that  they  might 
guard  their  homes  and  families.^'*- 

Here  active  preparations  were  made  for  a  new  expedition 
against  the  savages.  Now  that  Bacon  had  a  commission  signed 
by  the  Governor  and  confirmed  with  the  public  seal,  men  were 
quite  eager  to  follow  him.  On  all  sides  volunteers  flocked  in 
to  offer  their  services  against  the  brutal  enemy.  Even  Coun- 
cillors and  Burgesses  encouraged  their  neighbors  to  enlist, 
declaring  that  no  exception  could  be  taken  to  the  legality  of 
the  commission. ^^^  Thus  hundreds  swallowed  "down  so  fair 
a  Bait,  not  seeing  Rebellion  at  the  end  of  it".^^"* 

In  the  meanwhile,  the  Governor,  angered  at  the  great  indig- 
nities put  upon  him,  was  planning  to  regain  his  lost  authority. 
A  petition  was  drawn  up  in  Gloucester  county  by  Sir  William's 
friends,  denouncing  Bacon,  and  asking  that  forces  be  raised  to 
suppress  him."^  Although  most  of  the  Gloucestermen,  it 
would  seem,  had  no  part  in  this  request,  Berkeley  crossed  over 
the  York  River  to  their  county  and  began  to  enlist  volun- 
teers.^*® But  he  met  with  little  success.  Even  in  this  part  of 
the  colony  Bacon  was  the  popular  hero,  and  men  refused  to 
serve  against  him.  It  seemed  outrageous  to  many  that  while 
he  was  out  to  fight  the  common  enemy,  the  Governor  should 
attack  him  in  the  rear.  All  his  desperate  efforts  were  in 
vain.  Sick  at  heart  and  exhausted  from  exertions  too  great 
for  his  age,  he  is  said  to  have  fainted  away  in  the  saddle. ^^'^ 

The  news  that  Berkeley  was  raising  forces  reached  Bacon 

'*"  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  356.  '"  Ibid. 

'"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-16.  '** COs-1371-384,  385. 

•"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-383.  '"Mass.  S.  IV,  Vol.  IX,  p.  181. 

>«P.  R.  O.,  COS-1371-38S. 

"'P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-387;  T.  M.,  p.  20. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  171 

at  the  falls  of  James  River,  just  as  he  was  going  to  strike  out 
into  the  woods.  "Immediately  he  causes  the  Drums  to  Beat 
and  Trumpets  to  sound  for  calling  his  men  to-gether."^^*. 
"Gentlemen  and  Fellow  Soldiers,"  he  says,  when  they  are 
assembled,  "the  news  just  now  brought  me,  may  not  a  little 
startle  you  as  well  as  myselfe.  But  seeing  it  is  not  altogether 
unexpected,  wee  may  the  better  beare  it  and  provide  our 
remedies.  The  Govemour  is  now  in  Gloster  County  endeavour- 
ing to  raise  forces  against  us,  having  declared  us  Rebells  and 
Traytors.  ...  It  is  Revenge  that  hurries  them  on  without 
regard  to  the  Peoples  safety.  (They)  had  rather  wee  should 
be  Murder'd  and  our  Ghosts  sent  to  our  slaughter'd  Country- 
men by  their  actings,  then  wee  live  to  hinder  them  of  their 
Interest  with  the  Heathen.  .  .  .  Now  then  wee  must  be  forced 
to  turne  our  Swords  to  our  own  Defence,  or  exix>se  ourselves 
to  their  Mercyes.  .  .  .  Let  us  descend  to  know  the  reasons 
why  such  a  proceedings  are  used  against  us  .  .  .  (why)  those 
whome  they  have  raised  for  their  Defence,  to  preserve  them 
against  the  Fury  of  the  Heathen,  they  should  thus  seek  to 
Destroy.  (Was  there)  ever  such  a  Theachery  .  ,  .  heard 
of,  such  Wickednesse  and  inhumanity?  But  they  are  damned 
Cowards,  and  you  shall  see  they  will  not  dare  to  meet  us  in 
the  field  to  try  the  Justnesse  of  our  Cause."^^® 

Whereupon  the  soldiers  all  cried,  "Amen.  Amen."  They 
were  ready  to  follow  him.  They  would  rather  die  fighting 
than  be  hanged  like  rogues.  It  would  be  better  to  attack  the 
Governor  at  once  than  have  him  come  upon  their  rear  while 
they  were  engaged  in  the  woods  with  the  savages. ^^**  And  so, 
with  universal  acclaim,  they  gathered  up  their  arms,  and  set  out 
to  give  battle  to  the  Governor. 

But  Berkeley  had  fled.  Upon  finding  that  the  militia  of 
Gloucester  and  Middlesex  would  not  support  him,  he  had 
taken  ship  for  the  Eastern  Shore.  Here,  for  the  time  being,  he 
was  safe  from  the  angry  rebels.  It  would  be  difficult  for 
Bacon  to  secure  vessels  enough  to  transport  his  men  over  to 
Accomac;  to  march  them  hundreds  of  miles  around  the  head 
of  Chesapeake  Bay  was  out  of  the  question. 

^«P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-385.  '*•?.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-385. 

'~P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-386. 


172  -  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

The  flight  of  the  Governor  left  Bacon  undisputed  master  of 
all  the  mainland  of  Virginia.  Everywtiere  he  was  hailed  by 
the  people  as  their  hero  and  deliverer.  Those  that  still  re- 
mained loyal  to  Sir  William  either  fled  with  him  or  rendered 
their  submission  to  the  rebel.  For  a  while,  at  least,  he  could 
prosecute  the  Indian  war  and  redress  the  public  grievances 
without  fear  of  interruption.  ^^^ 

But  now  Bacon  was  confronted  with  the  question  of  what 
attitude  he  should  assume  to  the  English  government.  Ber- 
keley had  written  home  denouncing  him  as  a  rebel  and  traitor. 
The  King  assuredly  would  not  tolerate  his  conduct.  No  doubt 
preparations  were  already  being  made  to  send  British  troops  to 
the  colony.  Should  he  defy  the  King  and  resist  his  soldiers 
in  the  field  of  battle? 

Bacon  made  up  his  mind  to  fight.  The  dense  woods,  the 
many  swamps  and  creeks,  the  vast  distances  of  the  colony 
would  all  be  favorable  to  him.  He  would  resort  to  the  Indian 
method  of  fighting.  His  men  were  as  brave  as  the  British; 
were  better  marksmen.  Five  hundred  Virginians,  he  was  sure, 
would  be  a  match  for  two  thousand  red  coats.  If  England 
sought  to  bring  him  to  his  knees,  by  blockading  the  coast  and 
cutting  off  all  foreign  trade,  he  would  appeal  to  the  Dutch  or 
even  to  the  French  for  assistance.  Assuredly  these  nations 
would  not  neglect  so  favorable  an  opportunity  of  injuring  their 
old  rival  and  enemy.  He  even  cherished  a  wild  dream  of 
leading  his  rebels  back  into  the  woods,  to  establish  a  colony 
upon  an  island  in  the  Roanoke  river.  ^^^ 

But  Bacon  knew  that  the  people  would  hesitate  to  follow 
him  into  open  resistance  to  England.  Ties  of  blood,  of  reli- 
gion, of  interest  were  too  strong.  All  the  injustice  done  them 
by  the  King,  all  the  oppression  of  the  Navigation  Acts,  could 
not  make  them  forget  that  they  were  Englishmen.  So  he 
found  it  necessary  to  deceive  them  with  a  pretence  of  loyalty. 
He  himself  took  the  oath  of  allegiance  and  supremacy,  and 
he  imposed  it  upon  all  his  followers.  His  commands  were  issued 
in  the  King's  name.    He  even  went  to  the  absurd  extremity  of 

»^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-387. 

"•P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-232-240;  COi-39-38. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  I73 

declaring  it  for  the  service  of  the  Crown  to  disobey  the  King's 
commands,  to  arrest  the  King's  Governor,  to  fight  the  King's 
troops.  ^^^ 

ReaHzing  that  resistance  to  his  plans  would  come  almost 
entirely  from  the  upper  classes,  Bacon  made  especial  efforts 
to  seduce  the  wealthy  planters.  On  August  the  third,  a  num- 
ber of  influential  gentlemen  assembled  upon  his  summons  at 
Middle  Plantation,  to  discuss  the  means  of  protecting  the 
people  from  the  Indians,  and  preventing  civil  war.  After  de- 
livering a  long  harangue,  justifying  his  own  actions  and 
denouncing  the  Governor,  Bacon  requested  the  entire  company 
to  take  three  oaths  which  he  had  prepared.  First,  they  were 
to  promise  to  assist  him  in  prosecuting  the  Indian  war. 
Secondly,  they  must  combat  all  attempts  of  the  Governor  and 
his  friends  to  raise  troops  against  him.  Thirdly,  they  were 
asked  to  declare  it  consistent  with  their  allegiance  to  the  King 
to  resist  the  royal  troops  until  his  Majesty  could  be  informed 
by  letter  from  Bacon  of  the  justice  of  his  cause.^^*  This  last 
article  caused  prolonged  and  bitter  controversy.  But  Bacon 
locked  the  doors,  it  is  said,  and  by  persuasion  and  threats 
induced  them  all  to  sign.  The  three  oaths  were  taken  by  no 
less  than  sixty-nine  prominent  men,  among  them  Thomas 
Swann,  Thomas  Milner,  Philip  Lightfoot  and  Thomas 
Ballard.1^5 

Bacon  now  felt  himself  strong  enough  to  take  active  control 
of  the  administration  of  the  government.  He  did  not  assume, 
however,  the  title  of  Governor,  but  styled  himself  "General 
by  the  consent  of  the  people". ^^^  Nor  did  he  venture  to  pro- 
ceed in  the  alteration  of  laws  or  the  redress  of  grievances  with- 
out the  advice  and  support  of  the  representatives  of  the  people. 
In  conjunction  with  four  members  of  the  Council,  he  issued 
orders  for  an  immediate  election  of  a  new  Assembly,  to  meet 
on  the  fourth  of  September,  at  Jamestown.  ^^'^ 

Having  settled  these  matters,  Bacon  turned  his  attention 
to  two  military  expeditions — one  against  the  Indians,  the  other 

*"  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-41.  '"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-37-42. 

"*Ibid.  "'P.  R.  O.,  CO1-37-41. 

"^  P.  R.  O.,  COi-37-43. 


174  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUAIRTS 

against  the  Governor.  The  continued  activity  of  the  savages 
and  the  exposed  condition  of  the  frontier  demanded  his  per- 
sonal attention,  but  he  was  resolved  not  to  leave  the  lower 
counties  exposed  during  his  absence  to  attack  from  the  Eastern 
Shore.  Seizing  an  English  ship,  commanded  by  a  Captain 
Larrimore,  which  was  lying  in  James  River,  he  impressed  her, 
with  all  her  crew,  into  his  service  against  the  Governor.  In 
this  vessel,  with  a  sloop  and  a  bark  of  four  guns,  he  embarked 
a  force  of  two  hundred  or  more  men.^^^  The  expedition 
was  placed  under  the  command  of  Captain  William  Carver,  "a 
valiant,  stout  Seaman",  and  Gyles  Bland,  both  devoted  to 
Bacon's  cause  and  high  in  his  favor.  They  were  ordered  to 
patrol  the  coast  to  prevent  raids  upon  the  Western  Shore,  and, 
if  possible,  to  attack  and  capture  the  Governor. 

Bacon  himself  hastens  to  Henrico,  "where  he  bestirs  himself 
lustily  in  order  to  a  Speedy  March  against  the  Indians".  It 
was  his  intention  to  renew  his  attack  upon  the  Occaneechees 
and  the  Susquehannocks,  but  for  some  reason  he  gave  up  this 
design  to  turn  against  the  Pamunkeys.  Hastening  across  from 
the  James  to  the  York,  Bacon  met  Colonel  Gyles  Brent,  who 
brought  with  him  reinforcements  from  the  plantations  upon  the 
upper  waters  of  the  Rappahannock  and  Potomac.  Their  united 
forces  marched  to  the  extreme  frontier  and  plunged  into  the 
wilderness.  Discovering  a  narrow  path  running  through  the 
forest,  the  English  followed  it  to  a  small  Pamunkey  village 
situated  upon  a  neck  of  land  between  two  swamps.  As  Bacon's 
Indian  scouts  advanced  upon  the  place  they  were  fired  upon 
by  the  enemy.  Whereupon  the  English  came  running  up  to 
assault  the  village.  But  the  Pamunkeys  deserted  their  cabins 
and  fled  into  the  adjacent  swamps,  where  the  white  men 
found  it  impossible  to  pursue  them.  All  made  good  their  es- 
cape except  one  woman  and  one  little  child. ^^^ 

Continuing  his  march,  Bacon  stumbled  upon  an  old  squaw, 
the  nurse  of  the  Pamunkey  queen,  whom  he  ordered  to  act  as 
his  guide.  But  the  woman,  unwilling  to  betray  her  people,  led 
him  far  astray,  many  miles  from  the  Indian  settlements.    The 

"•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-388;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  p.  271. 
'"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-390. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  175 

English  followed  her  "the  remainder  of  that  day  &  almost 
another  day"  before  they  discovered  that  they  were  being 
deceived.  When  sure  of  her  treachery,  "Bacon  gave  com- 
mand to  his  soldiers  to  knock  her  on  the  head,  which  they  did, 
and  left  her  dead  on  the  way".^^^  The  army  now  wandered 
around  at  random  in  the  woods,  following  first  one  path  and 
then  another,  but  could  not  discover  the  enemy.  The  ap- 
pointed time  for  the  new  Assembly  was  approaching,  and  it 
was  imperative  for  Bacon  to  be  at  Jamestown  to  open  the 
session.  He  was  resolved,  however,  not  to  return  to  the 
colony  until  he  had  struck  a  decisive  blow  at  the  Indians. 
Sending  a  message  to  the  people  "that  he  would  be  with  them 
with  all  possible  speed",  he  resumed  his  discouraging  quest. ^"^^ 

But  the  Indians  still  eluded  him.  It  seemed  a  hopeless  task 
to  discover  their  villages  amid  the  dense  woods  and  treacher- 
ous swamps.  His  men  became  discouraged.  "Tyred,  murmur- 
ing, impatient,  hunger-starv'd",  many  begged  him  to  lead  them 
back  to  the  plantations.  But  Bacon  would  not  abandon  the 
expedition.  He  would  rather  die  in  the  woods,  he  said,  than 
disappoint  the  confidence  reposed  in  him  by  the  people.  Those 
that  felt  it  necessary  to  return  home,  he  would  permit  to 
depart  unmolested.  But  for  himself,  he  was  resolved  to  con- 
tinue the  march  even  though  it  became  necessary  to  exist  upon 
chincapins  and  horse  flesh."^  Whereupon  the  army  was  divided,, 
one  part  setting  out  for  the  colony,  the  other  resuming  the 
search  for  the  savages. 

That  very  day  Bacon  runs  upon  the  main  camp  of  the 
Pamunkeys  and  immediately  attacks  them.  The  savages  are 
encamped  upon  a  "piece  of  Champion  land",  protected  on 
three  sides  by  swamps,  and  covered  with  a  dense  growth  of 
"small  oke,  saplings,  Chinkapin-Bus'hes  and  grape  vines". 
As  the  English  charge  in  among  them  they  offer  little  resis- 
tance, but  desert  their  habitations  and  flee.  Some  are  shot 
down,  many  are  captured.  Bacon  takes  possession  of  all  their 
goods — "Indian  matts,  Basketts,  Match  cotes,  parcells  of 
Wampameag  and  Roanoke,  Baggs,  Skins,  ffurs",  etc. 

^~  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-391.  "'  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-392. 

^"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-392. 


176  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

The  poor  queen  fled  for  her  life  with  one  Httle  boy,  and 
wandered  fourteen  days  in  the  woods,  separated  from  her 
people.  "She  was  once  coming  back  with  designe  to  throw 
herself  upon  the  mercy  of  the  English",  but  "happened  to 
meet  with  a  deade  Indian  woman  lying  in  the  way,  .  .  . 
which  struck  such  terror  in  the  Queen  that  fearing  their 
cruelty  by  that  ghastly  example,  shee  went  on  .  .  .  into  the 
wild  woodes".  Here  she  was  preserved  from  starvation  by 
eating  part  of  a  terrapin,  found  by  the  little  boy.^^^  After 
this  victory,  Bacon  secured  his  plunder  and  his  captives,  and 
hastened  back  to  the  plantations. 

In  the  meanwhile  the  expedition  against  Accomac  had  ended 
in  disastrous  failure. ■'^^  Carver  and  Bland  had  been  given  in- 
structions to  capture  the  Governor,  and  Bacon  proposed,  if 
ever  he  got  him  in  his  power,  to  send  him  to  England,  there 
to  stand  trial  for  his  misgovernment  and  his  betrayal  of  the 
people  to  the  barbarous  Indians. ^^^  Even  though  it  was  quite 
probable  that  the  King  would  send  him  back,  the  colony  would 
for  a  time  be  rid  of  his  troublesome  presence. 

Upon  the  arrival  of  the  little  fleet  off  the  coast  of  Accomac, 
it  was  decided  to  send  Carver  ashore  under  a  flag  of  truce, 
to  treat  with  the  Governor.^®*  Leaving  Bland  to  guard  the 
fleet  with  a  force  not  superior  in  number  to  the  English 
sailors,  Carver  set  out  in  the  sloop  "with  the  most  trusty  of 
his  men".^^'''  In  the  meanwhile  Captain  Larrimore  and  his 
sailors,  who  resented  their  enforced  service  with  the  rebels, 
were  plotting  to  betray  them  to  the  enemy.  In  some  way 
Larrimore  contrived  to  get  a  message  to  Berkeley,  requesting 
him  to  send  out  a  party  of  loyal  gentlemen  in  boats,  and 
promising  to  deliver  his  ship  into  their  hands."*  The  Governor 
at  first  was  loath  to  venture  upon  such  a  hazardous  under- 
taking. ^^^  The  whole  thing  might  be  a  snare  to  entrap  his 
men.  Yet  his  situation  was  desperate ;  he  must  take  desperate 
chances. 

'"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-393.  ""  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-393. 

'"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-394.  '"Ibid. 

"'T.  M.,  p.  22. 

^"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-394;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  p.  271. 

'"Burk,  Vol.  II.  p.  271. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  I77 

Placing  a  party  of  twenty-six  men  in  two  small  boats,  he 
sent  them  out  under  the  command  of  Colonel  Philip  Ludwell, 
to  surprise  the  ship.^^^  Fearing  that  Carver  might  return 
before  the  capture  could  be  effected,  Berkeley  "caressed  him 
with  wine",  and  detained  him  with  prolonged  negotiations. 
Upon  reaching  the  ship,  Ludwell  and  his  men  rowed  up  close 
under  her  side,  and  clambered  in  at  "the  gun  room  ports", 
"One  courageous  gentleman  ran  up  to  the  deck,  and  clapt  a 
pistoll  to  Bland's  breast,  saying  you  are  my  prisoner. "^"^^  The 
rest  of  the  company  followed  upon  his  heels,  brandishing  their 
pistols  and  swords.  Cap^tain  Larrimore  and  his  crew  caught 
up  spikes,  which  they  had  ready  at  hand,  and  rushed  to  Lud- 
well's  assistance.  The  rebels,  taken  utterly  by  surprise,  many 
no  doubt  without  arms,  "were  amazed  and  yielded", ^^^ 

A  short  while  after.  Carver  was  seen  returning  in  the  sloop 
from  his  interview  with  the  Governor,  "They  permit  the  boat 
to  come  soe  neere  as  they  might  ffire  directly  downe  upon  her, 
and  soe  they  alsoe  commanded  Carver  on  Board  &  secured 
him.  When  hee  saw  this  surprize  he  stormed,  tore  his  haire 
off,  and  curst,  and  exclaimed  at  the  Cowardize  of  Bland  that 
had  betrayed  and  lost  all  their  designe."^'^^  Not  long  after 
he  was  tried  for  treason  by  court  martial,  condemned,  and 
hanged.  ^^"^ 

Elated  by  this  unexpected  success,  the  Governor  determined 
to  make  one  more  effort  to  regain  his  lost  authority.  The 
rebels  were  now  without  a  navy;  they  could  not  oppose  him 
upon  the  water,  or  prevent  his  landing  upon  the  Western 
Shore.  With  the  gentlemen  that  had  remained  loyal  to  him, 
the  troops  of  Accomac,  many  runaway  servants  and  English 
sailors  he  was  able  to  raise  a  force  of  several  hundred  men.^'^^ 
Embarking  them  in  Captain  Larrimore's  ship,  in  the  Adam 
and  Eve,  and  sixteen  or  seventeen  sloops,  he  set  sail  for 
Jamestown.^'* 

"*  Ibid.  '"  T.  M.,  p.  22. 

"'T.  M.,  p.  22.  "'P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-394. 

"*T.  M.,  p.  23;  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-52,  54. 

"'  The  account  of  the  King's  commissioners  places  the  number  at  six 
hundred ;  in  Bacon's  Proceedings  it  is  given  as  one  thousand. 
"•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-394;  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  21. 


178  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

In  the  meanwhile  the  appointed  date  for  the  convening  of 
the  Assembly  had  come.  It  is  probable  that  the  members 
were  arriving  to  take  their  seats  when  the  news  of  the  Gov- 
ernor's approach  reached  the  town.^'^'^  Bacon  was  still  absent 
'upon  the  Pamunkey  expedition.  There  seems  to  have  been 
no  one  present  capable  of  inspiring  the  rebels  with  confidence, 
or  of  leading  them  in  a  vigorous  defense.  When  the  sails  of 
the  Governor's  fleet  were  seen,  on  the  seventh  of  September, 
wending  their  way  up  the  river,  the  place  was  thrown  into  the 
wildest  confusion.  Sir  William  sent  a  message  ashore,  offer- 
ing a  pardon  to  all,  with  the  exception  of  Lawrence  and  Drum- 
mond,  that  would  lay  down  their  arms  and  return  to  their 
allegiance. ^'^^  But  few  seem  to  have  trusted  him,  "feareing  to 
meet  with  some  afterclaps  of  revenge". ^''^^  That  night,  before 
the  place  could  be  fully  invested,  the  rebels  fled,  "every  one 
shifting  for  himselfe  with  no  ordnary  feare".^^*^  "CoUonell 
Larence  .  .  .  f  orsooke  his  owne  howse  with  all  his  wealth  and 
a  faire  cupbord  of  plate  entire  standing,  which  fell  into  the 
Governour's  hands  the  next  morning."^®^ 

This  was  the  unwelcome  news  which  greeted  Bacon  upon 
his  return  from  the  Indian  expedition.  So  many  of  his  sol- 
diers had  left  for  their  homes  before  the  final  defeat  of  the 
Pamunkeys,  that  he  now  had  with  him  less  than  one  hundred 
and  fifty  men.^®^  Yet  he  resolved  to  march  at  once  upon 
Jamestown  to  attack  the  Governor.  His  little  band  gave  him 
enthusiastic  assurance  of  loyal  support.  He  knew  that  he  had 
the  well  wishes  and  prayers  of  the  people,  while  his  opponents 
were  "loaded  with  their  curses".  Berkeley's  men,  although 
so  much  more  numerous  than  his  own,  he  believed  to  be 
cowards  that  would  not  dare  appear  against  him  in  the  field. 
Victory  would  be  easy  and  decisive.  ^®^ 

So,  after  delaying  a  short  while  to  gather  reinforcements 
from  New  Kent  and  Henrico,  he  marched  with  extraordinary 
swiftness  down  upon  the  enemy.^^^     Everywhere  along  the 

"''  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  22.  "'  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  22. 

"'  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  22.  ^^  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  22. 

'"  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  22.  "^  P.   R.   O.,   CO5-1371-394. 

"«P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-39S.  '"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-39S. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  I79 

route  he  was  hailed  by  the  people  as  their  deliverer.  The 
sight  of  the  sullen  Indian  captives  that  he  led  along  with  him 
"as  in  a  Shew  of  Triumph",  caused  enthusiastic  rejoicing. 
Many  brought  forth  fruit  and  other  food  to  refresh  his 
weary  soldiers.  The  women  swore  that  if  he  had  not  men 
enough  to  defeat  the  Governor,  they  themselves  would  take 
arms  and  follow  him.  All  prayed  for  his  success  and  happi- 
ness, and  exclaimed  against  the  injustice  of  his  enemies. ^*^ 

Before  Berkeley  had  been  in  possession  of  Jamestown  one 
week.  Bacon  was  upon  him.  On  the  evening  of  September 
the  thirteenth,  the  little  rebel  band  arrived  at  Sandy  Bay, 
driving  before  them  a  party  of  the  Governor's  horse. ^^^  With 
singular  bravado.  Bacon  himself  rode  up  to  the  enemy,  fired 
his  carbine  at  them,  and  commanded  his  trumpets  to  sound 
their  defiance.^*'''  Few  thought,  however,  he  would  attempt  to 
capture  the  town,  for  the  Governor's  position  was  very  strong. 
The  narrow  isthmus,  by  which  alone  the  place  could  be  ap- 
proached, was  defended  by  three  heavy  guns  planted  behind 
strong  palisades.^*®  Upon  the  left,  "almost  close  aborde  the 
shore,  lay  the  ships,  with  their  broadesides  to  thunder"  upon 
any  that  dared  to  assault  the  works.  The  loyal  forces  had 
recently  been  augmented  to  a  thousand  men,  and  now  outnum- 
bered the  rebels  three  to  one.  Yet  Bacon  seems  to  have  medi- 
tated from  the  first  an  attack  upon  the  place,  and  was 
confident  of  success.^®® 

Although  his  men  had  marched  many  miles  that  day  he  set 
them  immediately  to  work  within  gun-shot  of  the  enemy,  build- 
ing an  entrenched  camp.^^*'  All  night  long,  by  the  light  of  the 
moon,  the  soldiers  toiled,  cutting  bushes,  felling  trees  and 
throwing  up  earthworks.  But  it  soon  became  apparent  that 
their  utmost  efforts  would  not  suffice  to  complete  the  trenches 
before  dawn,  when  the  enemy's  guns  would  be  sure  to  open 
upon  them.  In  this  dilemma,  Bacon  hit  upon  a  most  unmanly 
expedient  to  protect  his  men  at  their  work.  Sending  out  sev- 
eral small  parties  of  horse,  he  captured  a  number  of  ladies,  the 


\ 


P.  R. 

0.,  C05-I37I-395. 

^'•P.   R. 

0.,   COs-1371-396. 

P.  R. 

o.,  CO5-1371-397,  400. 

^  Bac's 

Pros.,    p.   24. 

Bac's 

Pros.,  p.  24. 

'"^P.   R. 

0.,  CO5-1371-396. 

i8o  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

wives  of  some  of  Berkeley's  most  prominent  supporters. 
"Which  the  next  morning  he  presents  to  the  view  of  there 
husbands  and  ffriends  in  towne,  upon  the  top  of  the  smalle 
worke  hee  had  cast  up  in  the  nig*ht,  where  he  caused  them  to 
tarey  till  hee  had  finished  his  defence."^®^  The  husbands  were 
enraged  that  the  rebels  should  thus  hide  behind  the  "white 
aprons"  of  their  innocent  wives,  but  they  dared  not  make  an 
assault. 

When,  however,  the  ladies  were  removed,  "upon  a  Signall 
given  from  ye  Towne  the  Shipps  fire  their  Great  Guns  and  at 
the  same  tyme  they  let  fly  their  small-Shott  from  the  Palai- 
sadoes.  But  that  small  Sconse  that  Bacon  had  caused  to  be 
made  in  the  night,  of  Trees,  Bruch,  and  Earth  soe  defended 
them  that  the  Shott  did  them  noe  damage  at  all,  and  was 
returned  back  as  fast  from  the  little  Fortresse."^^^ 

Fearing  that  this  cannonade  will  be  followed  by  an  assault 
upon  his  works,  Bacon  places  a  lookout  on  the  top  of  a  near-by 
brick  chimney,  which  commands  a  view  of  the  peninsula.  On 
the^xteenth,  the  watchman  announces  that  the  enemy  are  pre- 
paring for  an  assault,  and  the  rebels  make  ready  to  give  them 
a  warm  reception.  The  Governor's  forces,  six  or  seven  hun- 
dred strong,  dash  across  the  Sandy  Bay,  in  an  attempt  to  storm 
Bacon's  redoubts.^^^  Horse  and  foot  "come  up  with  a  narrow 
front,  pressing  very  close  upon  one  another's  shoulders".  But 
many  of  them  fight  only  from  compulsion,  and  have  no  heart 
for  their  task.  At  the  first  volleys  of  shot  that  pour  in  upon 
them  from  the  rebel  army,  they  throw  down  their  arms  and 
flee.  They  marched  out,  as  one  chronicler  says,  "like  schol- 
ars going  to  school  .  .  .  with  heavy  hearts,  but  returned  horn 
with  light  heels". ^^^  Their  officers  were  powerless  to  stem 
the  rout,  until  they  were  safe  under  the  protection  of  the 
palisades.^^^ 

"^Cotton,  p.  8;  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  24.  The  report  of  the  commissioners 
places  this  incident  some  days  later,  after  the  assault  of  the  15th.  The 
author  has  followed  the  account  given  in  Bacon's  Proceedings,  which 
seems  to  him  probably  more  correct.  Bacon  could  have  no  object  in 
exposing  the  ladies  after  his  trenches  were  completed,  his  heavy  guns 
mounted  and  the  enemy  defeated. 

"*  P.  R.  O.,  C05-I37I-397.  "'  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  25. 

*"  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  25.  ""  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-398,  400. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  i8i 

The  Governor's  losses  in  dead  and  wounded  were  very  small, 
but  the  moral  effect  of  his  defeat  was  great.  The  rebels  were 
so  elated  at  their  easy  victory,  and  so  scornful  of  their 
cowardly  opponents,  "that  Bacon  could  scarce  keep  them  from 
immediately  falling  to  storm  and  enter  the  Towne".^^^  On 
the  other  hand,  the  loyal  troops  were  utterly  discouraged. 
Many  of  them,  that  had  been  "compelled  or  hired  into  the  Ser- 
vice", and  "were  intent  only  on  plunder",  clamored  for  the 
desertion  of  the  place,  fearing  that  the  victorious  rebels  would 
soon  burst  in  upon  them.^^"^ 

,'-7  "The  next  day  Bacon  orders  3  grate  guns  to  be  brought 
into  the  camp,  two  whereof  he  plants  upon  his  trench.  The 
one  he  sets  to  worke  against  the  Ships,  the  other  against  the 
entrance  into  the  towne,  for  to  open  a  pasage  to  his  intended 
storm."^^^  Had  the  rebels  delayed  no  longer  to  make  an 
assault  it  seems  certain  they  could  have  carried  the  palisades 
with  ease,  taken  many  of  the  enemy,  and  perhaps  captured  the 
Governor  himself.  The  loyal  soldiers  were  thinking  only 
of  flight.  "Soe  great  was  the  Cowardize  and  Basenesse  of  the 
generality  of  Sir  William  Berkeley's  party  that  of  all  at  last 
there  were  only  some  20  Gentlemen  willing  to  stand  by  him." 
So  that  the  Governor,  "who  undoubtedly  would  rather  have 
dyed  on  the  Place  than  thus  deserted  it,  what  with  (the)  im- 
portunate and  resistless  solicitations  of  all  was  at  last  over 
persuaded,  nay  hurried  away  against  his  will".^^^  "Takeing 
along  with  him  all  the  towne  people,  and  their  goods,  leaveing 
all  the  grate  guns  naled  up,  and  the  howses  emty",  he  left  the 
place  a  prey  to  the  rebels.^"*^  "So  fearful  of  discovery  they  are, 
that  for  Secrecy  they  imbarque  and  weigh  anchor  in  the  Night 
and  silently  fall  down  the  river."^*^^ 

'^  Early  the  next  morning  Bacon  marched  across  the  Sandy 
Bay  and  took  possession  of  the  deserted  town.^®^  Here  he 
learned  that  the  Governor  had  not  continued  his  flight,  but 
had  cast  anchor  twenty  miles  below,  where  he  was  awaiting 

"•  P.  R.  O,  CO5-1371-400.  '»'  Ibid. 

"'Bac's  Pros.,  p.  25.  ^»»  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-400. 

"»*  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26.  =»'  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-400. 

*='?.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-401 ;  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26. 


i82  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

a  favorable  opportunity  to  recapture  the  place.^*^^  At  the  same 
time,  news  came  from  the  north  that  Colonel  Brent,  Bacon's 
former  ally,  was  collecting  troops  in  the  counties  bordering 
upon  the  Potomac  River,  and  would  soon  be  on  the  march  to 
the  Governor's  assistance,  with  no  less  than  a  thousand  men.^^* 
Should  this  new  army,  by  acting  in  concert  with  the  fleet,  suc- 
ceed in  blocking  Bacon  up  at  Jamestown,  the  rebels  would  be 
caught  in  a  fatal  trap.  The  peninsula  could  hardly  be  de- 
fended successfully  against  superior  forces  by  land  and  water, 
and  they  would  be  crushed  between  the  upper  and  nether  mill- 
stones. On  the  other  hand,  should  they  desert  the  town,  in 
order  to  go  out  against  Brent,  Berkeley  would  undoubtedly 
return  to  take  possession  of  it,  and  all  the  fruits  of  their  victory 
would  be  lost. 

After  long  consultation  with  his  chief  advisors,  Bacon 
decided  to  destroy  the  town.^°^  That  very  night  he  set  fire 
to  the  place,  which  in  a  few  hours  was  reduced  to  ashes.  Not 
even  the  state-house,  or  the  old  church  were  spared.  Drum- 
mond  and  Lawrence,  it  is  said,  showed  their  unselfish  zeal  for 
the  cause  by  applying  the  torch  to  their  homes  with  their  own 
hands.^"^  As  the  Governor,  from  his  ships,  saw  in  the  distance 
the  glare  of  the  burning  buildings,  he  cursed  the  cowardice  of 
his  soldiers  that  had  forced  him  to  yield  the  place  to  the  rebels. 
But  as  it  could  now  serve  him  no  longer  as  a  base,  he  weighed 
anchor,  and  set  sail  for  Accomac.^^'^ 

Deserting  the  ruined  town.  Bacon  led  his  men  north 
to  Green  Spring,  and  thence  across  York  River  into 
Gloucester  county.  Here  there  came  to  him  a  messenger 
riding  "post  haste  from  Rapahanock,  with  news  that  Coll: 
Brent  was  advancing  fast  upon  him".^*^^  At  once  he  summons 
his  soldiers  around  him,  tells  them  the  alarming  news,  and  asks 
if  they  are  ready  to  fight.  The  soldiers  answer  "with  showtes 
and  acclamations  while  the  drums  thunder  a  march  to  meet 
the  promised  conflict".^"® 

*"Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26.  *"  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26. 

*"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-401.  "•  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-405. 

*"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-401 ;  COi -39-22 ;  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26. 
**Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26.  *°»  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  183 

Bacon  had  advanced  not  "above  2  or  3  days  jurney,  but  he 
meets  newes  .  .  .  that  Brents  men  were  all  run  away,  and 
left  him  to  shift  for  himselfe".^^^  Like  the  troops  that  had  so 
signally  failed  of  their  duty  in  the  battle  of  Sandy  Bay,  these 
northern  forces  had  no  desire  to  meet  Bacon.  Many  of  them 
were  undoubtedly  pressed  into  service ;  many  were  in  sympathy 
with  the  rebellion.  At  all  events  they  deserted  their  leaders 
before  the  hostile  army  came  in  sight,  and  fled  back  to  their 
homes. 

Thus  Bacon  once  more  found  himself  master  of  all  the 
mainland  of  Virginia.  But  his  situation  was  more  critical 
than  it  had  been  in  July  and  August.  Many  of  the  prominent 
gentlemen  that  had  then  given  him  their  support,  and  had  taken 
his  three  oaths,  were  now  fighting  on  the  side  of  the  Governor. 
It  was  quite  certain  that  royal  forces  were  being  equipped 
for  an  expedition  to  Virginia,  and  might  make  their  appear- 
ance within  the  capes  before  many  more  weeks.  Moreover, 
the  disastrous  failure  of  Carver  and  Bland  had  left  him 
without  a  navy  and  exposed  all  the  Western  Shore  to  attack 
from  the  loyal  forces  in  Accomac. 

ReaHzing  his  danger,  Bacon  felt  it  necessary  to  bind  the 
people  to  him  more  closely.  Summoning  the  militia  of 
Gloucester  to  meet  him  at  their  county  court-house,  he  de- 
livered a  long  harangue  before  them  and  tendered  them  an 
oath  of  fidelity.  They  were  asked  to  swear  that  if  the  King's 
troops  attempted  to  land  by  force,  they  would  "fly  to-gether  as 
in  a  common  calamity,  and  jointly  with  the  present  Army  .  .  . 
stand  or  fall  in  the  defense  of  .  .  .  the  Country".  And  "in 
Case  of  utmost  Extremity  rather  then  submitt  to  so  miserable 
a  Slavery  (when  none  can  longer  defend  ourselves,  our  Lives 
and  Liberty's)  to  acquit  the  Colony. ^^^ 

The  Gloucestermen  were  most  reluctant  to  take  this  oath. 
A  Mr.  Cole,  speaking  for  them  all,  told  Bacon  that  it  was  their 
desire  to  remain  neutral  in  this  unhappy  civil  war.  But  the 
rebel  replied  that  if  they  would  not  be  his  friends,  they  must 
be  his  enemies.  They  should  not  be  idle  and  reap  the  benefit 
of  liberty  earned  by  the  blood  of  others.     A  minister,  named 

"•  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  26.  ^'  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-402. 


i84  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Wading,  who  was  active  in  persuading  the  men  to  refuse  the 
oath,  was  committed  to  prison  by  Bacon,  with  the  warning 
that  the  church  was  the  proper  place  for  him  to  preach,  not 
the  camp.  Later,  it  seems,  fearing  the  consequences  of  further 
refusal,  the  Gloucester  troops  yielded  and  took  the  binding 
engagement.  ^^^ 

Bacon  now  turned  his  thoughts,  it  is  said,  to  an  expedition 
against  Accomac.  But  his  preparations  were  never  com- 
pleted. For  some  time  he  had  been  ill  of  dysentery  and  now 
was  "not  able  to  hould  out  any  longer". ^^^  He  was  cared  for 
at  the  house  of  a  Mr.  Pate,  in  Gloucester  county,  but  his  condi- 
tion soon  became  worse.^^^  His  mind,  probably  wandering  in 
delirium,  dwelt  upon  the  perils  of  his  situation.  Often  he 
would  enquire  if  the  guard  around  the  house  was  strong,  or 
whether  the  King's  troops  had  arrived.  Death  came  before 
the  end  of  October.^^^  Bacon's  place  of  burial  has  never 
been  discovered.  It  is  supposed  that  Lawrence,  to  save  the 
body  of  his  friend  from  mutilation  by  the  vindictive  old  Gov- 
ernor, weighted  the  coffin  with  stones  and  sunk  it  in  the  deep 
waters  of  the  York.^^^ 

The  death  of  Bacon  proved  an  irreparable  loss  to  the  rebels. 
It  was  impossible  for  them  to  find  another  leader  of  his  un- 
daunted resolution,  his  executive  ability,  his  power  of  com- 
mand. No  one  could  replace  him  in  the  affections  of  the 
common  people.  It  would  not  be  correct  to  attribute  the 
failure  of  the  rebellion  entirely  to  the  death  of  this  one  man, 
yet  it  undoubtedly  hastened  the  end.  Had  he  continued  at 
the  head  of  his  faithful  army,  he  might  have  kept  the  Gov- 
ernor indefinitely  in  exile  upon  the  Eastern  Shore,  or  even 
have  driven  him  to  take  refuge  upon  the  water.  In  the  end 
Bacon  would  have  been  conquered,  for  he  could  not  have  held 
out  against  the  English  fleet  and  the  English  troops.  But  he 
would  have  made  a  desperate  and  heroic  resistance. 

The   chief   command   fell   to  Lieutenant-General   Ingram. 

"*  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-401 ;  Bac's  Pros.,  p.  27. 
*"Bac's  Pros.,  p.  28.  *"   P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-404. 

"'Bacon's  Proceedings  places  the  death  of  Bacon  on  Oct.  18;  the  Com- 
missioners give  the  date  as  Oct.  26. 
"•  T.  M.,  p.  24. 


BACOiN'S  REBELLION  185 

The  selection  seems  to  have  been  popular  with  the  soldiers,  for 
when  it  was  announced,  they  "threw  up  their  caps,  crying  out 
as  loud  as  they  could  bellow,  God  save  our  new  Generall".^^''^ 
Ingram  is  depicted  by  some  of  the  chroniclers  as  a  man  of  low 
birth,  a  dandy  and  a  fool,  but  there  is  reason  to  believe  their 
impeachment  too  harsh.  Although  he  lacked  Bacon's  force 
of  character  and  had  no  executive  ability,  as  a  general  he 
showed  considerable  talent,  and  more  than  held  his  own  against 
the  Governor. 

The  mastery  of  the  water  was  an  advantage  to  Berkeley  of 
the  very  greatest  importance.  The  numerous  deep  rivers  run- 
ning far  up  into  the  country  made  it  easy  for  him  to  deliver 
swift,  telling  blows  at  any  point  in  the  enemy's  position.  In 
order  to  guard  the  James,  the  York  and  the  Rappahannock  it 
became  necessary  for  the  rebels  to  divide  their  forces  into  sev- 
eral small  bands.  On  the  other  hand,  the  entire  strength  of 
the  loyalists  could  be  concentrated  at  any  time  for  an  unex- 
pected attack. 

Ingram  made  his  chief  base  at  West  Point,  where  the  Mat- 
tapony  and  the  Pamunkey  unite  to  form  the  broad  and  stately 
York.^^^  Here  he  could  watch  both  banks  of  the  river,  and 
could  concentrate  his  men  quickly  either  upon  the  Peninsula, 
or  in  Gloucester  or  Middlesex.  At  this  place  were  gathered 
several  hundred  rebels  under  Ingram  himself.  But  it  was 
deemed  wise  to  leave  other  detachments  at  various  places  lower 
down  in  the  country,  to  prevent  the  enemy  from  landing,  and 
to  suppress  any  rising  of  the  people  in  favor  of  the  Governor. 
At  the  house  of  Colonel  Bacon,  in  York  county,  a  force  of 
thirty  or  forty  men  were  posted  under  the  command  of  Major 
Whaly.^^^  "The  next  Parcell,  considerable,  was  at  Green 
Spring,  the  Governours  howse,  into  which  was  put  about  100 
men  and  boys."  Their  leader,  a  Colonel  Drew,  fortified  the 
place  strongly,  barricading  all  approaches,  and  planting  three 
large  guns  "to  beate  of  the  Assailants".  Another  small  de- 
tachment, under  Colonel  Hansford,  was  posted  "at  the  Howse 
where  Coll :  Reade  did  once  live",  the  site  of  famous  old 
Yorktown.^2° 

"'  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  32.  *"»  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  39. 

^°  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  40.  ^  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  39. 


i86  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

This  last  post,  situated  near  the  mouth  of  the  river,  was 
especially  exposed  to  attack  from  the  Eastern  Shore.  A  few 
days  after  the  death  of  Bacon,  Major  Robert  Beverley,  with  a 
small  force,  sailed  across  the  bay  to  effect  its  capture.^^^  The 
rebels  "kep  a  negligent  Gard",  and  were  caught  completely  by 
surprise.  Hansford  was  taken  prisoner,  with  twenty  of  his 
men,  and  brought  in  triumph  to  Accomac. 

Here  he  was  at  once  charged  with  treason,  tried  by  court 
martial,  and  condemned  to  die.  He  pleaded  passionately  to 
"be  shot  like  a  soldier  and  not  to  be  hanged  like  a  Dog.  But 
it  was  tould  him  .  .  .  that  he  was  not  condemned  as  he  was 
merely  a  soldier,  but  as  a  Rebell,  taken  in  Arms.""'^  To  the 
last  he  refused  to  admit  that  he  was  guilty  of  treason.  To  the 
crowd  that  gathered  around  the  scaffold  to  witness  his  execu- 
tion he  protested  "that  he  dyed  a  loyal  subject  and  a  lover 
of  his  country". 

"This  business  being  so  well  accomplish'd  by  those  w'ho  had 

taken    Hansford,  .  .  .  they   had    no    sooner   deliver'd    there 

Fraight  at  Accomack,  but  they  hoyse  up  there  sayles,  and  back 

againe  to  Yorke  River,  where  with  a  Marvellous  celerity  they 

surprise  one  Major  Cheise-Man,   and  som  others,   amongst 

whom  one  Capt.  Wilford,  who  (it  is  saide)  in  the  bickering 

lost  one  of  his  eyes,  which  he  seemed  little  concern'd  at,  as 

knowing  that  when  he  came  to  Accomack,  that  though  he  had 

bin  Starke  blinde,  yet  the  Govemour  would  take  care  for  to 

afford  him  a  guide,  that  should  show  him  the  way  to  the 
Gallows."223 

The  Governor  was  resolved  to  make  the  rebel  leaders  pay 
dearly  for  the  indignities  they  had  put  upon  him.  Those  that 
were  so  luckless  as  to  fall  into  his  hands,  were  hastened  away 
to  their  execution  with  but  the  mockery  of  a  trial.  Doubtless 
Berkeley  felt  himself  justified  in  this  severity.  To  him  rebel- 
lion against  the  King  was  not  merely  a  crime,  it  was  a  hideous 
sacrilege.  Those  guilty  of  such  an  enormity  should  receive 
no   mercy.      But   this   cannot  explain  or  excuse  the   coarse 

"*  The  news  of  Hansford's  capture  reached  Captain  Morris  near  Nanse- 
mond  Nov.   I2th. 
*"  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  33.  *"  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  35- 


BACON'S  REBELLION  187 

brutality  and  savage  joy  with  which  he  sent  his  victims  to  the 
scaffold.  It  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  many  of  these  exe- 
cutions were  dictated,  not  by  motives  of  policy  or  loyalty, 
but  by  vindictiveness. 

Nothing  can  make  this  more  evident  that  the  pathetic  story 
of  Madam  Cheesman.  "When  .  .  .  the  Major  was  brought  in 
to  the  Governor's  presence,  and  by  him  demanded,  what  made 
him  to  ingage  in  Bacon's  designes?  Before  that  the  Major 
could  frame  an  Answer  ...  his  Wife  steps  in  and  tould  his 
honr:  that  it  was  her  provocations  that  made  her  Husband 
joyne  in  the  Cause  that  Bacon  contended  for;  ading,  that  if 
he  had  not  bin  influenced  by  her  instigations,  he  had  never 
don  that  which  he  had  don.  Therefore  (upon  her  bended 
knees)  she  desires  of  his  honr  .  .  .  that  shee  might  be  hang'd, 
and  he  pardon'd.  Though  the  Governour  did  know,  that  that 
what  she  had  saide,  was  neare  to  the  truth,"  he  refused  her 
request  and  spumed  her  with  a  vile  insult.  It  is  with  a  sense 
of  relief  that  we  learn  that  her  husband  died  in  prison  and  was 
thus  saved  the  ignominy  of  the  gallows. ^^* 

Encouraged  by  his  successes,  Berkeley  now  planned  a  more 
formidable  invasion  of  the  Western  Shore.  Public  sentiment, 
he  hoped,  was  beginning  to  turn  in  his  favor.  The  death  of 
Bacon  had  deprived  the  rebellion  of  all  coherency  and  definite- 
ness  of  purpose.  The  country  was  getting  weary  of  the 
struggle,  and  was  anxious  for  the  reestablishment  of  law  and 
order.  In  Gloucester  and  Middlesex  especially  there  were 
many  prominent  planters  that  awaited  an  opportunity  to  take 
up  arms  against  the  rebels.  And  although  the  common  people 
were  indifferent  to  the  Governor's  cause,  they  would  be  forced 
to  enlist  under  him  could  he  but  get  a  firm  foothold  in  those 
counties.^^^ 

So  he  sailed  into  York  River  with  a  fleet  of  four  ships  and 
several  sloops,  and  a  force  of  one  hundred  soldiers. ^^^  Land- 
ing a  party,  under  command  of  Major  Robert  Beverley,  upon 
the  north  bank,  he  surprised  and  captured  a  number  of  the 
enemy  at  the  residence  of  a  Mr.  Howard.^^'^    He  then  set  up 

^  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  36.  ^  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  38. 

""Ing's  Pros.,  p.  38.  "^  Ing's    Pros.,   p.   38. 


i88  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

his  standard  at  the  very  house  in  which  Bacon  had  died,  and 
sent  out  summons  to  all  loyal  citizens  to  come  to  his  support. 
Here  there  soon  "appeared  men  enough  to  have  beaten  all  the 
Rebells  in  the  countrey,  onely  with  their  Axes  and  Hoes".-^^ 
They  were  quickly  organized  into  an  army  and  placed  under 
the  command  of  Major  Lawrence  Smith. ^^^  Almost  simul- 
taneously the  people  of  Middlesex  began  to  take  up  arms  in 
support  of  the  Governor,  and  for  a  while  it  seemed  that  the 
rebels  would  be  overwhelmed  and  driven  back  upon  the 
frontiers. 

But  Ingram  acted  with  vigor  and  promptness.  He  dis- 
patched a  body  of  horse,  under  Lientenant-General  Walkelett, 
to  attack  and  disperse  the  Middlesex  troops  betfore  their 
numbers  become  formidable.  With  the  main  body  of  the 
rebels  he  himself  remained  at  West  Point,  to  watch  the  move- 
ments of  the  enemy  in  Gloucester.  When  Major  Smith  heard 
of  Walkelett's  advance,  he  at  once  hastened  north  to  intercept 
him,  leaving  a  garrison  at  Mr.  Pate's  house,  to  guard  that 
post  and  maintain  intact  his  communication  with  the  fleet  in 
York  River.  But  he  was  not  quick  enough.  Before  he  could 
complete  his  march,  news  came  to  him  that  Walkelett  had 
dispersed  the  Middlesex  troops  and  was  preparing  to  give 
battle  to  him.230 

In  the  meanwhile,  Ingram,  hearing  that  Smith  had  marched 
north,  "by  the  advice  of  his  officers  strikes  in  betweene  him  and 
his  new  made  Garrisson  at  M.  Pates.  He  very  nimbly  invests 
the  Howse",  and  forces  its  defenders  to  surrender.  Hardly 
had  he  accomplished  this  task,  "but  M.  L.  Smith,  having  re- 
tracted his  march  out  of  Middlesex  .  .  .  was  upon  the  back  of 
Ingram  before  he  was  aware".  This  new  move  placed  the 
rebels  in  no  little  peril,  for  the  Gloucester  forces  were  between 
them  and  their  base  at  West  Point.  Defeat  at  this  juncture 
would  have  meant  utter  destruction  for  Ingram's  army. 

As  the  two  bands  faced  each  other,  "one  Major  Bristow 
(on  Smith's  side)  made  a  Motion  to  try  the  equity,  and  just- 
ness of  the  quarrill,  by  single  combett  .  .  .  proffering  him- 

^Ing's  Pros.,  p.  40.  *"Ing's  Pros.,  p.  40. 

***Ing's  Pros.,  p.  40. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  189 

selfe  against  any  one  (being  a  Gent.)  on  the  other  side.  .  .  . 
This  motion  was  as  redely  accepted  by  Ingram,  as  proffered 
by  Bristow ;  Ingram  swaring,  the  newest  oath  in  fashion,  that 
he  would  be  the  Man;  and  so  advanceth  on  foot,  with  sword 
and  Pistell,  against  Bristow ;  but  was  fetched  back  by  his  owne 
men",  who  had  no  desire  to  risk  their  leader  in  this  duel.^^^ 

But  the  Gloucester  troops  were  not  inspired  to  deeds  of 
courage  by  the  intrepidity  of  their  champion.  They  had  no 
desire  to  encounter  the  veterans  that  had  defeated  the  Gov- 
ernor before  Jamestown  and  twice  hunted  the  savages  out  of 
their  hidden  lairs.  Despite  all  the  efforts  of  their  officers  they 
opened  negotiations  with  Ingram  and  agreed  to  lay  down 
their  arms.  No  less  than  six  hundred  men,  it  is  said,  thus 
tamely  surrendered  to  the  rebels.  Major  Smith  and  some  of 
his  officers,  when  they  found  themselves  betrayed  by  their 
men,  fled  and  made  good  their  escape.  Other  "chiefe  men" 
fell  into  the  enemy's  hands  and  were  held  as  prisoners  of  war. 
Ingram  "dismist  the  rest  to  their  own  abodes". ^^^ 

It  was  a  part  of  the  Governor's  plan  to  secure  a  foothold 
also  upon  the  right  bank  of  the  river  and  to  drive  the  rebels 
out  of  York  county.  With  this  in  view,  he  sent  out  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  men,  under  Captain  Hubert  Farrill,  to  surprise 
and  capture  the  rebels  commanded  by  Major  Whaly,  at 
Colonel  Bacon's  house.  To  advise  and  assist  Farrill,  Colonel 
Ludwell  and  Colonel  Bacon  himself  accompanied  the  expedi- 
tion. They  decided  to  steal  silently  up  to  the  place  in  the 
early  hours  of  the  morning  before  dawn,  drive  in  the  sentries 
and  "enter  pell  mell  with  them  into  the  howse".  But  their 
plans  miscarried  woefully.  "The  Centrey  had  no  sooner  made 
the  challenge  .  .  .  who  comes  there?  .  .  .  but  the  other 
answer  with  their  Musquits  (which  seldom  speakes  the  lan- 
guage of  friends)  and  that  in  so  loud  a  maner,  that  it  alarmed 
those  in  the  howse  to  a  defence,  and  then  to  a  posture  to 
salley  out."  The  attacking  party  took  refuge  "behinde  som 
out  buildings,  .  .  .  giving  the  Bullits  leave  to  grope  their 
owne  way  in  the  dark".  Here  they  stood  their  ground  for  a 
short  while  and  then  fled  back  to  their  boats.     Several  were 

^  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  42.  *"  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  42. 


190  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

taken  prisoners,  but  none  were  killed  save  Farrill  himself, 
'"whose  commission  was  found  droping-wett  with  blood,  in  his 
pockett".233 

The  failure  of  these  operations  in  the  York  were  partly 
offset  by  successes  in  the  southern  counties.  Late  in  December 
a  loyal  force,  consisting  in  part  of  English  sailors,  landed  on 
the  right  bank  of  the  James  and  defeated  a  party  of  the  rebels, 
killing  their  leader  and  taking  thirteen  prisoners.  Four  days 
later,  they  captured  one  of  the  enemy's  forts.  Soon  large  parts 
of  Isle  of  Wight  and  Surry  had  been  overrun  and  the  people 
reduced  to  their  allegiance.  During  the  first  week  of  Jan- 
uary several  hundred  rebels  gathered  upon  the  upper  James 
to  retrieve  their  waning  cause,  but  they  seem  to  have  melted 
away  without  accomplishing  anything,  and  at  once  all  the 
south  bank  of  the  river  submitted. ^^* 

Almost  simultaneously  in  all  other  parts  of  the  colony  the 
rebellion  collapsed.  The  defeats  of  the  Governor  in  Gloucester, 
Middlesex  and  York  had  not  long  postponed  the  end.  The 
failure  of  the  movement  was  due,  not  to  military  successes  by 
Berkeley,  but  to  hopeless  internal  weakness.  Since  the  death 
of  Bacon  the  insurgent  leaders  had  been  unable  to  maintain 
law  and  order  in  the  colony.  Ingram,  although  he  showed 
some  ability  as  a  general,  proved  utterly  unfitted  to  assume 
control  of  civil  affairs.  Bacon,  when  Sir  William  fled  to 
Accomac,  had  grasped  firmly  the  reins  of  government,  calling 
a  part  of  the  Council  to  his  assistance,  summoning  a  new  As- 
sembly, and  retaining  sheriffs  and  justices  in  their  offices. 
Like  Cromwell,  he  had  shown  himself  not  only  a  soldier,  but  a 
civil  ruler  of  force  and  ability.  But  Ingram  could  not  com- 
mand the  respect  and  obedience  of  the  people.  Under  him 
the  machinery  of  government  seems  to  have  broken  down. 
The  unhappy  colony  was  given  over  to  disorder  and  anarchy. 
We  are  inclined  to  wonder  why  Drummond  or  Lawrence  did 
not  assume  the  chief  command  in  the  government  after  Bacon's 
death.  Both  were  men  of  intelligence  and  ability,  both  es- 
teemed by  the  people,  and  both  devoted  heart  and  soul  to  the 

^  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  43. 

""P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-416;  COi -37-52;  CO1-39-10. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  191 

rebellion.  For  some  reason,  neither  could  take  the  leadership, 
and  affairs  fell  into  hopeless  confusion. 

Without  a  government  to  supply  their  needs,  or  to  direct 
their  movements,  the  rebel  bands  found  it  necessary  to  main- 
tain themselves  by  plundering  the  estates  of  the  Governor's 
friends.  Many  wealthy  planters  paid  for  their  loyalty  with 
the  loss  of  their  cattle,  their  sheep,  their  corn  and  wheat,  and 
often  the  very  furniture  of  their  houses.  At  times  the  rebel 
officers  could  not  restrain  their  rough  soldiers  from  wanton 
waste  and  destruction.  Crops  were  ruined,  fences  thrown 
down,  houses  burned. ^^^  Disgusted  with  this  anarchy,  and 
seeing  that  Ingram  could  not  preserve  order,  many  of  the 
people  began  to  long  for  the  end  of  the  rebellion.  Even  the 
misgovemment  of  Berkeley  was  better  than  lawlessness  and 
confusion. 

Ingram  himself  seems  to  have  perceived  that  the  end  was  at 
hand.  Intelligence  came  to  him  that  some  of  his  own  party, 
dissatisfied  with  his  conduct,  were  awaiting  an  opportunity  to 
deprive  him  of  the  chief  command.  The  long  expected  arri- 
val of  the  English  troops  would  bring  swift  and  complete 
ruin,  for  under  the  present  conditions,  he  could  not  hope  for 
success  against  them.  So  he  soon  became  quite  willing  "to 
dismount  from  the  back  of  that  horse  which  he  wanted  skill, 
and  strength  to  Manidge".  Could  he  but  secure  a  pardon 
from  the  Governor,  he  would  gladly  desert  the  failing  cause 
of  the  people,  and  return  to  his  allegiance.^^^ 

Nor  was  Sir  William  less  anxious  to  come  to  terms  with 
Ingram.  It  had  been  a  bitter  humiliation  to  him  to  be  thrust 
headlong  out  of  his  government  by  the  rebellious  people.  It 
would  add  to  his  shame  to  be  restored  by  English  troops. 
Could  he  but  reduce  the  colony  before  the  arrival  of  the 
red  coats,  his  position  would  appear  in  a  much  better  light, 
both  in  Virginia  and  in  England.  So  he  sent  a  Captain 
Grantham  to  negotiate  with  Ingram  and  to  offer  him  immunity 
and  pardon  in  return  for  prompt  submission.  The  rebel 
leader  willingly  accepted  these  terms  and  returned  to  his 
allegiance.^^^ 

^P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-45.  ^Ing's  Pros.,  p.  45. 

""'Ing's  Pros.,  p.  45;  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-416. 


192  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

More  delicate  was  the  task  of  inducing  the  troops  at  West 
Point  to  follow  the  example  of  their  general.  It  was  a  ques- 
tion whether  Ingram,  "or  any  in  the  countrye  could  command 
them  to  lay  down  their  arms".  An  attempt  to  betray  them,  or 
to  wring  the  sword  out  their  hands  by  violence  would  probably 
end  in  failure.  It  was  thought  more  prudent  to  subdue  "these 
mad  fellows"  with  "smoothe  words",  rather  than  by  "rough 
deeds".  So  Grantham  presented  himself  to  them,  told  of 
Ingram's  submission  and  offered  them  very  liberal  terms  of 
surrender.  They  were  to  be  paid  for  the  full  time  of  their 
service  since  the  granting  of  Bacon's  commission;  those  that 
so  desired  were  to  be  retained  in  arms  to  fight  the  Indians; 
all  servants  among  them  were  to  secure  immediate  release  from 
their  indentures.  Deserted  by  their  leader  and  tempted  by 
these  fair  promises,  the  men  were  at  last  persuaded  to  yield. 
Grantham  embarked  them  on  the  fleet  and  took  them  down 
to  Tindall's  Point,  there  to  make  their  submission  and  "kiss 
the  Governour's  hand".^^^ 

Almost  at  the  same  time  overtures  were  made  by  the  Gov- 
ernor to  General  Walkelett.  Could  this  man  be  induced  to 
surrender  himself  and  his  troops,  the  last  great  obstacle  to 
peace  would  be  removed.  So  anxious  was  Sir  William  to 
seduce  him  from  the  cause  of  the  rebels,  that  he  offered  him 
not  only  his  pardon,  but  part  of  the  plunder  taken  by  Bacon 
from  the  Indians.^^^  Walkelett  assented,  and  agreed  to  lead 
his  troops  to  Tindall's  Point,  and  "declare  for  ye  King's 
Majesty,  the  Governour  &  Country".  He  was  to  find  there  "a 
considerable  Company  of  resolved  men",  to  assist  him  in  case 
his  own  party  offered  resistance.^*^  This  arrangement  seems 
to  have  been  carried  out  successfully  and  Walkelett's  entire 
command  was  taken.^^^ 

The  collapse  of  the  rebellion  sounded  the  death  knell  of 
those  "chiefe  Incendiaries"  Drummond  and  Lawrence.  These 
men  had  long  protested  against  Berkeley's  arbitrary  govern- 
ment, and  had  been  largely  instrumental  in  bringing  on  the 
insurrection.     Bacon  had  considered  them  his  chief  advisors 

""Ing's  Pros.,  p.  46;  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-416. 

'™  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-39-13.  ^  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-501. 

""P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-416. 


BACON'S  REBELLION  193 

and  friends.  So  deep  was  the  Governor's  hatred  of  them  that 
in  his  recent  proclamations  he  had  excepted  them  from  the 
general  pardon. ^^^ 

When  Ingram  and  Walkelett  surrendered,  these  "arch 
rebels"  were  stationed  on  the  south  side  of  the  York  River,  at 
a  place  called  Brick  House.  When  they  heard  of  Ingram's 
intended  desertion,  they  made  desperate  but  futile  efforts  to 
prevent  his  designs.  Failing  in  this,  they  determined  to  gather 
around  them  the  remnants  of  the  rebel  forces  and  march 
towards  the  frontier,  in  hopes  of  kindling  anew  the  waning 
spirit  of  resistance.  "They  sent  downe  to  Coll:  Bacons  to 
fetch  of  the  Gard  there,  under  .  .  .  Whaly,  to  reinforce 
their  own  strength."  Whaly,  whose  position  was  more  ex- 
posed than  their  own,  promptly  obeyed,  and  succeeded  in 
bringing  off  his  force  with  "the  last  remains  of  Coll :  Bacon's 
Estate".  The  rebel  leaders  now  mustered  about  three  hundred 
men,  and  with  these  they  retreated  through  New  Kent,  "think- 
ing (like  the  snow  ball)  to  increase  by  their  rouleing".  "But 
finding  that  in  stead  of  increasing  there  number  decreast ;  and 
that  the  Moone  of  there  fortune  was  now  past  the  full,  they 
broke  up  howse-keeping,  every  one  shifting  for  him  selfe."^^^ 

And  now  the  chief  rebels  were  hunted  down  like  wild  beasts 
by  the  Governor's  troops.  Thomas  Hall,  formerly  clerk  of  the 
New  Kent  county  court,  Thomas  Young,  Major  Henry  Page, 
and  a  man  named  Harris  were  captured  and  led  before  Sir 
William.  They  were  all  tried  by  court  martial,  on  shipboard 
off  Tindall's  Point,  convicted  of  treason,  and  at  once  sent  to 
their  execution.^^^ 

A  few  days  later  Drummond  was  found,  exhausted  and  half 
starved,  hiding  in  Chickahominy  swamp.^*^  When  he  was 
brought  before  the  Governor,  that  resentful  old  man  could  not 
restrain  his  joy.  He  is  said  to  have  "complimented  him  with 
the  ironicall  sarcasm  of  a  low  bend",  declaring  that  he  was 
more  welcome  than  any  other  man  in  Virginia,  or  even  his 
own  brother.24«  The  next  day  Berkeley  went  to  Colonel 
Bray's  house  and  here  Drummond  was  conducted  on  foot  to 

*"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-39-10;  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  47. 

^  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  48.  ""  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  49. 

^  Drummond  was  captured  Jan.  14,  1677. 

^T.  M.,  p.  23;  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  49. 


194  .  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

stand  his  trial.  "In  his  way  thither  he  complained  very  much 
that  his  Irons  hurt  him,  and  .  .  .  expressed  abundance  of 
thankes  for  being  permitted  to  rest  himself e  upon  the  Roade, 
while  he  tooke  a  pipe  of  Tobacco, "^^'^  But  he  refused  the  offer 
of  a  horse,  saying  he  would  come  soon  enough  to  his  death  on 
foot. 

At  his  trial  he  was  treated  with  brutal  harshness,  his  clothes 
stripped  from  his  back  and  his  ring  torn  from  his  finger.  Al- 
though the  rebellion  was  now  over,  he  was  denied  jury  trial, 
and  was  condemned  by  court  martial  after  a  hearing  of  but 
half  an  hour.  Some  months  later,  when  this  matter  came  to 
the  attention  of  the  English  Privy  Council,  the  Lord  Chancel- 
lor exclaimed  that  "he  knew  not  whether  it  were  lawful  to 
wish  a  person  alive,  otherwise  he  could  wish  Sir  William  Ber- 
keley so,  to  see  what  could  be  answered  to  such  barbarity". ^^® 

Thus  ended  the  rebellion.  Apparently  it  had  accomplished 
nothing  for  the  cause  of  liberty  or  the  relief  of  the  oppressed 
commons.  Few  of  the  abuses  that  had  caused  the  people  to 
take  arms  had  been  rectified.  The  taxes  were  heavier  than 
ever,  the  Governor  was  more  severe  and  arbitrary.  English 
troops  were  on  their  way  to  the  colony  to  enforce  submission 
and  obedience.  Charles  II,  irritated  at  the  independent  spirit 
of  the  Virginians,  was  meditating  the  curtailment  of  their 
privileges  and  the  suppression  of  their  representative  institu- 
tions. Yet  this  attack  of  an  outraged  people  upon  an  arbi- 
trary and  corrupt  government,  was  not  without  its  benefits. 
It  gave  to  future  Governors  a  wholesome  dread  of  the  com- 
mons, and  made  them  careful  not  to  drive  the  people  again 
into  the  fury  of  rebellion.  It  created  a  feeling  of  fellowship 
among  the  poor  planters,  a  consciousness  of  like  interests  that 
tended  to  mould  them  into  a  compact  class,  ready  for  con- 
certed action  in  defense  of  their  rights.  It  gave  birth  in  the 
breasts  of  many  brave  men  to  the  desire  to  resist  by  all  means 
possible  the  oppression  of  the  Stuart  kings.  It  stirred  the 
people  to  win,  in  their  legislative  halls,  victories  for  the  cause 
of  liberty,  as  real  as  those  which  Bacon  and  his  followers 
had  failed  to  secure  on  the  field  of  battle.  ■* 

**'  Ing's  Pros.,  p.  so. 

"'Burk,  Vol.  II,  p."  266;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-74,  75;  CO389.6.  Lawrence 
and  Whaly  made  good  their  escape  into  the  forest.  They  probably  perished, 
however,  from  exposure,  or  at  the  hands  of  the  Indians. 


CHAPTER  VII 
The  Period  of  Confusion 

When  the  news  reached  England  that  the  common  people 
of  Virginia  were  in  open  revolt  against  their  Governor,  and 
had  driven  him  from  his  capital,  the  King  was  not  a  little  sur-  \ 
prised  and  alarmed.     The  recollection  of  the  civil  war  in 
England  was  still  fresh  enough  in  his  memory  to  make  him 
tremble  at  the  mutterings  of  rebellion,  even  though  they  came| 
from  across  the  Atlantic.     Moreover,  since  the  customs  from  ■ 
the  Virginia  tobacco  yielded  many  thousand  pounds  annually,  i 
he  could  but  be  concerned  for  the  royal  revenue.    If  the  tumults 
in  the  colony  resulted  in  an  appreciable  diminution  in  the 
tobacco  crop,  the  Exchequer  would  be  the  chief  loser.    Nor  did 
the  King  relish  the  expense  of  fitting  out  an  army  and  a  fleet 
for  the  reduction  of  the  insurgents. 

His  anxiety  was  increased  by  lack  of  intelligence  from  the 
colonial  government.  Several  letters  telling  of  Bacon's  coer- 
cion of  the  June  Assembly  had  reached  him,  but  after  that 
months  passed  without  word  from  the  Governor  or  the  Coun- 
cil. From  private  sources,  however,  came  reports  of  "uproars 
so  stupendous"  that  they  could  hardly  find  belief.^  It  was 
rumored  in  England  that  Sir  William  had  been  defeated, 
driven  out  of  the  colony,  and  "forced  to  lie  at  sea".^ 

Charles  seems  to  have  perceived  at  once  that  Berkeley  must 
have  been  responsible  for  the  Rebellion.  He  probably  cared 
very  little  whether  the  old  Governor  oppressed  the  people  or 
not,  so  long  as  he  kept  them  quiet,  but  it  was  an  inexcusable 
blunder  for  him  to  drive  them  into  insurrection.  Charles 
himself,  it  is  said,  had  resolved  long  before,  never  to  resume 
his  travels;  he  now  wondered  why  Sir  William  had  brought 
upon  himself  this  forced  journey  to  Accomac.  He  decided  to  ■ 
institute  an  investigation  to  find  out  what  the  Governor  had; 

*P.  R.  O.,  CO 389.6-177.  "Ibid. 

195 


196  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

been  doing  so  to  infuriate  the  people.  A  commission,  consist- 
ing of  Colonel  Herbert  Jeffreys,  Sir  John  Berry  and  Colonel 
Francis  Moryson,  was  appointed  to  go  to  Virginia  to  enquire 
into  and  report  all  grievances  and  pressures.^ 

Early  in  June,  1676,  Berkeley  had  written  the  King,  com- 
plaining that  his  age  and  infirmities  were  such  that  he  could 
no  longer  perform  properly  his  office  in  Virginia,  and  request- 
ing that  he  be  allowed  to  retire  from  active  service.^  The 
Council  had  protested  against  this  resignation,  but  Charles 
thought  it  best  to  take  Sir  William  at  his  word  and  to  recall 
him  from  the  government  he  had  not  been  able  to  preserve  in 
peace  and  quiet.  In  honor  of  his  long  service,  and  his  well 
known  loyalty,  he  was,  however,  to  retain  "the  title  and  dignity 
of  Governor".^  He  was  ordered  to  return  to  England  "with 
all  possible  speed",  to  report  upon  his  administration  and  to 
give  an  account  of  the  extraordinary  tumults  in  the  colony.^ 
During  his  absence  the  duties  of  his  office  were  to  be  entrusted 
to  Colonel  Herbert  Jeffreys,  who  was  to  bear  the  title  of 
Lieutenant-Governor.''^  He  was  not,  however,  to  be  the  deputy 
or  assistant  of  Sir  William,  and  "to  all  intents  and  purposes" 
was  made  Governor-in-chief.  Berkeley  was  to  be  "no  wayes 
accountable"  for  his  actions  good  or  bad.® 

The  King  instructed  Colonel  Jeffreys,  before  attempting  to 
subdue  the  rebels  by  force  of  arms,  to  exhaust  all  peaceable 
means  of  securing  their  submission.  In  order  to  make  this 
task  more  easy,  he  drew  up  and  had  printed  a  proclamation 
of  pardon,  which  he  directed  him  to  publish  throughout  the 
colony.  All,  it  declared,  with  the  sole  exception  of  Bacon, 
that  should  surrender  themselves,  and  take  the  oath  of  alle- 
giance and  supremacy,  were  to  receive  free  and  full  forgive- 
ness. Charles  felt  that  most  of  the  colonists  were  at  heart 
still  loyal,  and  would,  if  their  grievances  were  redressed,  be 
glad  to  accept  his  royal  offer  of  grace. 

*The   commission   had   consisted   at  first  of   Sir  John   Berry,   Colonel 
Francis  Moryson  and  Thomas  Fairfax.     P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-37-53. 
*P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-113,  174.  'P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-113. 

•P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-121,  174,  175.        'P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-113. 
•P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-137,  139,  140,  144;  COi-38-7. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  197 

But  he  did  not  rely  entirely  upon  gentle  measures,  for,  after 
all,  the  stubborn  Virginians  might  distrust  his  promises  and 
reject  the  pardon.  So  he  resolved  to  send  to  the  colony  a 
strong  body  of  troops  to  bring  them  to  their  senses,  if  neces- 
sary, at  the  point  of  the  bayonet.  A  thousand  men,  thoroughly 
equipped  for  active  service,  were  put  under  the  command  of 
Colonel  Jeffreys  and  embarked  for  the  colony.^ 

In  the  meanwhile,  Governor  Berkeley,  having  regained  his  | 
authority,  was  busily  engaged  in  reimbursing  himself  and  his  ■ 
friends  for  their  losses  in  the  Rebellion.     There  can  be  no  ■ 
doubt  that  many  of  the  loyalists  had  suffered  severely  by  the 
depredations  of  the  insurgents. ^*^     Those  that   followed  the 
Governor  into  exile  upon  the  Eastern  Shore,  had  been  com- 
pelled to  leave  their  estates  to  the  mercy  of  the  enemy.     And 
the  desperate  rebels,  especially  after  death  had  removed  the 
strong  arm  of   Bacon,   had   subjected   many   plantations   to 
thorough  and   ruthless  pillage.     Crops  had  been  destroyed, 
cattle  driven  off,  farm  houses  burned,  servants  liberated.    Al- 
most every  member  of  the  Council  had  suffered,  while  Berkeley 
himself  claimed  to  have  lost  no  less  than  £10,000.^^ 

Thus,  it  was  with  a  spirit  of  bitterness  and  hatred  that  the 
loyalists,  in  January  and  February,  returned  to  their  ruined 
homes.  Quite  naturally,  they  set  up  a  clamor  for  compensa- 
tion from  the  estates  of  those  that  had  plundered  them.  Now 
that  the  King's  authority  had  been  restored,  and  the  cause  they 
had  contended  for  had  triumphed,  they  demanded  that  the 
vanquished  should  be  made  to  disgorge  their  plunder  and  pay 
for  their  wanton  destruction.  Surely  the  Governor's  followers 
could  not  be  expected  to  accept  readily  all  these  great  losses 
as  a  reward  for  their  loyalty. 

But  restoration  upon  a  large  scale  would  almost  certainly 
entail  injustice,  and  would  fan  again  the  flames  of  bitterness 
and  hatred.  It  might  be  possible  to  restore  many  articles  yet 
remaining  in  the  hands  of  the  rebels,  but  most  of  the  plundered 
goods  had  long  since  been  consumed.  It  was  often  impossible 
to  determine  what  persons  had  been  guilty  of  specific  acts  of 

'P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-116.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-149,  154. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-40-110;  CO5-1371-27,  33,  62,  63,  64. 


198  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

pillage,  while  many  of  the  most  active  rebels  were  very 
poor  men,  from  whom  no  adequate  compensation  could  "be 
obtained. 

There  ensued  an  undignified  and  pernicious  scramble  by  the 
loyalists  to  seize  for  their  own  use  the  property  of  the  few 
well-to-do  insurgents.  On  all  sides  confiscation,  unauthorized 
seizures,  and  violence  marked  the  collapse  of  the  Rebellion. 
In  these  proceedings  Sir  William  took  the  lead.  His  servants 
went  out,  under  pretence  of  searching  for  his  stolen  property, 
to  take  for  his  use  the  sheep,  the  cattle,  and  other  goods  of  the 
neighboring  rebels. ^^  He  showed,  it  was  declared,  "a  greedy 
determination  thoroughly  to  heale  himself e  before  hee  car'd 
to  staunch  the  bleeding  gashes  of  the  woefully  lacerated 
country.  .  .  .  Making  and  treating  men  as  delinquents,  before 
any  due  conviction  or  attainder,  by  seizing  their  estates,  cattle, 
servants  and  carrying  off  their  tobacco,  marking  hogsheads 
and  calling  this  securing  it  to  the  King's  service."^^ 

Even  more  unjustifiable  was  the  conduct  of  Sir  William  in 
resorting  to  arbitrary  compositions  with  his  prisoners  to  fill 
his  exhausted  purse.^^  Men  were  arrested,  thrown  into  jail, 
terrified  with  threats  of  hanging,  and  released  only  upon  re- 
signing to  the  Governor  most  or  all  of  their  estates. ^^  One 
James  Barrow  was  locked  up  at  Green  Spring  and  refused 
permission  to  plead  his  case  before  the  Governor.  He  was 
told  that  his  release  could  be  secured  only  upon  the  payment 
of  a  ruinous  composition.  "By  reason,"  he  said,  "of  the 
extremity  of  Cold,  hunger,  lothsomnesse  of  Vermin,  and  other 
sad  occasions,  I  was  forct  to  comply. "^^  Edward  Loyd  was 
held  for  twenty-one  days,  while  his  plantation  was  invaded, 
and  his  wife  so  frightened  that  she  fell  into  labor  and  died. 

It  was  proposed  by  the  loyalists  to  share  among  themselves 
the  estates  of  all  that  had  been  executed  for  treason,  had  died 
in  arms  against  the  King,  or  had  fled  from  the  colony  to 
escape  the  Governor's  vengeance.^'^  It  did  not  matter  to  them 
that  the  wretched  widows  and  orphans  of  these  men  would  be 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-ii,  17;  005-1371-^,  69,  62,  63,  64,  78,  79,  81,  82,  132. 
"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-152.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-132. 

"CO1-40-1  to  37;  COi -40-43;  CO5-1371-81,  82. 
"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-23.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-27,  33- 


^. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  I99 

left  destitute.  Nor  did  they  stop  to  consider  that  these  estates, 
if  forfeited  at  all,  could  not  be  seized  legally  for  private  use, 
but  should  revert  to  the  Crown.  They  thought  only  of  repair- 
ing their  own  ruined  fortunes.^® 

In  the  midst  of  this  confusion  and  lawlessness  Berry  and 
Moryson,  with  a  part  of  the  fleet  and  seventy  of  the  English 
soldiers,  arrived  in  the  James  River.  ^^  They  had  left  Ports- 
mouth November  the  nineteenth,  but  it  was  January  the 
twenty-ninth  before  they  reached  Virginia.^*^  Without  waiting 
for  Jeffreys  and  the  main  body  of  the  fleet,  they  notified  the 
Governor  of  their  arrival  and  requested  an  immediate  confer- 
ence. Berkeley  came  aboard  their  flag-ship,  the  Bristol,  Febru- 
ary the  first,  where  he  was  notified  of  their  mission  and 
intrusted  with  official  letters.^i  He  poured  into  the  ears  of  the 
commissioners  the  recital  of  the  exciting  events  of  the  past 
months — the  destruction  of  Jamestown,  Bacon's  death,  the 
surrender  of  Ingram  and  Walkelett,  the  execution  of  the 
leading  rebels,  the  return  of  "the  poore  Scattered  Loyal  party 
to  their  ruined  homes''.^-  Although  peace  had  been  restored 
not  three  weeks  before,  he  pretended  astonishment  that  the 
King  had  thought  it  necessary  to  send  soldiers  to  his  aid. 

Nor  could  he  conceal  his  irritation  at  the  mission  of  Berry 
and  Moryson.  That  Charles  should  think  it  necessary  to  make 
an  investigation  of  affairs  in  Virginia  betokened  a  lack  of 
confidence  in  the  Governor.  Berkeley's  friends  claimed,  no 
doubt  truly,  that  he  was  the  author  of  every  measure  of  im- 
portance adopted  by  the  government  of  Virginia.  An  inquiry 
into  conditions  in  the  colony  could  but  be  an  inquiry  into  his 
conduct.  And  the  Governor,  perhaps,  knew  himself  to  be 
guilty  of  much  that  he  did  not  wish  to  have  exposed  before  his 
royal  master. 

Moreover,  Berkeley  was  not  in  the  humor  to  brook  inter- 
ference at  this  juncture.  He  was  inexorably  resolved  that 
the  chief  rebels  should  be  brought  to  the  gallows  and  that  his 
own  followers  should  be  rewarded  for  their  faithfulness.     If 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-38.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-17,  20. 

""  Ibid.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-27,  33. 

"  Ibid. 


200  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

the  commissioners  intended  to  block  these  measures,  or  protest 
against  his  actions  when  in  violation  of  law,  they  might  expect 
his  bitter  hostility. 

Before  the  commissioners  had  been  in  Virginia  two  weeks 
their  relations  with  the  Governor  became  strained.     The  dis- 
posing of  the  "delinquents  Estates",  they  announced,  must  be 
referred  to  the  King.    Loyal  sufferers  should  not  secure  resti- 
tution except  by  due  process  of  law.     Seizures  of  tobacco  and 
\    other  goods  must  stop.     Soon  the  meetings  in  the  cabin  of 
the  Bristol  became  so  stormy  that  the  commissioners  decided 
to  hold  all  future  communication  with  Sir  William  in  writing. 
This  they  thought  necessary  because  his  "defect  of  hearing" 
not  only  made  privacy  impossible,  but  looked  "angrily,  by  loud 
and  fierce  speaking". ^^ 
f      A  few  days  later  Colonel  Jeffreys  arrived  with  the  remainder 
'  of  the  fleet.     He  and  his  fellow  commissioners   found  the 
whole  country  so  ruined  and  desolate  that  they  experienced 
considerable  difliculty  in  securing  a  place  of  residence.^^     As 
the  Governor  disobeyed  flatly  the  King's  commands  to  entertain 
them  at  Green  Spring,^^  they  were  compelled  to  accept  the 
hospitality  of  Colonel  Thomas  Swann  and  make  their  home 
at  his  seat  on  the  James  River.^®    On  the  twelfth  of  February, 
Jeffreys,  Berry  and  Moryson  went  to  Green  Spring,  where  they 
held   a   long   conference   with   Berkeley   and   the   Council.^'"^ 
\  Jeffreys  produced  his  commission,  and  read  the  clauses  which 
/  instructed  Berkeley  to  return  immediately  to  England,  and  to 
i  resign  the  government  into  his  hands.^^ 

It  is  easy  to  imagine  with  what  anger  Berkeley  and  his 
Council  received  this  command.  If  Sir  William  must  embark 
for  England  and  give  up  his  government  to  this  stranger,  they 
would  be  foiled  in  their  revenge  in  the  very  moment  of  tri- 
umph. Jeffreys  would  probably  put  an  end  to  the  wholesale 
plundering  of  the  rebels :  the  illegal  distribution  of  confiscated 
estates,  the  seizure  of  goods,  the  unjust  compositions.  It 
was  true  that  Sir  William  had  written  the  King  in  June  asking 

=*  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-55,  60.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-90,  94. 

^  P.  R.  O.,  CO391.2-173,  178.  "*  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-90,  94. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-83,  8s,  90,  94-    **  P.  R.  O.,  CO289.6-121. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  201 

his  recall,  but  many  things  had  happened  in  Virginia  since 
he  penned  that  letter.    He  was  passionately  opposed  to  leaving  i 
his  government  at  this  juncture. 

And  the  old  man's  quick  wit  found  an  excuse  for  remaining 
in  Virginia.  The  word  "conveniency"  in  his  orders  gave  him  \ 
a  loophole.^^  It  was  evident  to  all  that  the  King  wished 
him  to  return  without  delay,  but  Berkeley  pretended  to  believe 
that  this  word  had  been  inserted  in  order  to  permit  him  to  use 
his  own  convenience  in  selecting  the  date  of  departure.  The 
question  was  put  to  the  Council  and  this  body  gave  a  ready 
and  joyous  support  to  the  Governor's  interpretation.  Jeffreys 
and  the  commissioners  begged  them  to  consider  that  the  word 
referred  not  to  Sir  William's  "conveniency",  but  to  that 
of  the  King's  service,  yet  they  would  not  heed  them.^"  So 
Jeffreys  went  back  to  Swann's  Point  in  discomfiture  and  the 
old  Governor  remained  in  Virginia  for  three  months  more  to 
carry  to  completion  his  plans  of  restitution  and  revenge.^^ 
That  he  should  have  dared  thus  to  trifle  with  his  royal  master's 
commands,  which  all  his  life  he  had  considered  sacred,  reveals 
to  us  vividly  his  furious  temper  at  this  juncture.  The  humilia- 
tion and  indignities  he  had  experienced  during  the  Rebellion 
had  deprived  him  of  all  prudence. 

Had  Colonel  Jeffreys  been  a  man  of  force  he  would  not  have    \ 
submitted  to  this  juggling  with  the  King's  commands.    With  a 
thousand   British   troops   at  his   back,   he  could   easily   have 
arrested  Sir  William  and  forced  him  to  take  ship  for  England. 
Although  this  would  have  been  harsh  treatment  for  one  that 
had  so  long  served  the  King,  it  was  fully  justified  by  the  Gov- 
ernor's flagrant  disobedience.     And  it  would  have   relieved 
the  colony  of  the  presence  of  a  man  whose  inhuman  cruelty 
had  rendered  him  odious  to  the  people.    But  Jeffreys  knew  that  I 
the  Governor's  brother.  Lord  John  Berkeley,  was  high  in  the  ' 
King's   favor,  and  might  take  revenge   should  he   resort  to 
violent  measures.     So  he  contented  himself  with  writing  home  \ 
his  complaints,  and  sat  quietly  by,  while  Berkeley  carried  to  I 
completion  his  principal  designs.  , 

~  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-S0,  83.  *•  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-93,  94. 

''P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-40-88. 


a02  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

The  Governor  was  deeply  displeased  with  the  King's  procla- 
mation of  pardon.  Should  he  publish  it  at  once,  as  he  was 
ordered  to  do,  it  would  greatly  hinder  him  in  his  work  of 
revenge  and  render  more  difficult  his  illegal  seizures  and  con- 
fiscations. Since  the  pardon  excepted  only  Bacon,  under  its 
terms  such  notorious  rebels  as  Robert  Jones,  or  Whaly,  or 
even  Lawrence,  might  come  in  out  of  the  wilderness  and  de- 
mand immunity.  This  Berkeley  was  determined  should  not  be. 
He  thought  at  first  of  suppressing  the  pardon  entirely,  and  of 
setting  out  one  of  his  own  based  upon  it,  excepting  the  most 
\notorious  rebels.^^  The  commissioners  urged  him  to  publish 
|the  papers  unchanged,  as  the  King  would  undoubtedly  resent 
any  attempt  to  frustrate  his  intentions.^^  And  they  insisted 
that  there  should  be  no  delay.  "Observing  the  generality  of 
the  people  to  look  very  amazedly  one  upon  another",  at  the 
arrival  of  the  English  soldiers,  as  though  dreading  a  terrible 
revenge  by  the  King,  they  thought  it  highly  desirable  to 
"put  them  out  of  their  paine".^*  It  was,  they  declared,  by  no 
means  unlikely  that  a  new  rebellion  would  break  out,  for  the 
people  were  still  deeply  dissatisfied  and  "murmured  extremely". 

After  several  days  of  hesitation,  Berkeley  decided  to  issue 
the  King's  proclamation  unchanged.  Accordingly,  on  the 
tenth  of  February,  to  the  great  relief  of  "the  trembling 
people",  the  printed  copies  brought  over  by  the  commissioners 
were  made  public. ^^  But  with  them  the  Governor  published  a 
proclamation  of  his  own,  which  limited  and  modified  that  of 
his  Majesty.^®  Gyles  Bland,  Thomas  Goodrich,  Anthony 
Arnold,  and  all  other  rebels  then  in  prison  were  to  be  denied 
the  benefit  of  the  pardon.  The  King's  mercy  was  not  to  ex- 
tend to  Lawrence  and  Whaly ;  or  to  John  Sturdivant,  Thomas 
Blayton,  Robert  Jones,  John  Jennings,  Robert  Holden,  John 
Phelps,  Thomas  Mathews, ^"^  Robert  Spring,  Stephen  Earleton 
and  Peter  Adams;  or  "to  John  West  and  John  Turner,  who 
being  legally  condemned  for  rebellion  made  their  escapes  by 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-24.  "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-32. 

•*  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-SS,  60.  ""  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-32,  38. 

*•  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-276,  286. 

"This  Thomas  Mathews  was  probably  the  author  of  the  T.  M.  account 
of  Bacon's  Rebellion. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  203 

breaking  prison" ;  or  to  Sara  Grindon,  "who  by  her  lying  and 
scandalous  Reports  was  the  first  great  encourager  and  Setter 
on  of  the  ignorant"  people;  or  even  to  Colonel  Thomas 
Swann,  Colonel  Thomas  Beale  or  Thomas  Bowler,  former 
members  of  the  Council.^^  The  commissioners  thought  it 
highly  presumptuous  in  Berkeley  thus  to  frustrate  the  King's 
wishes,  and  they  were  careful  to  let  his  Majesty  know  the  Gov- 
ernor's disobedience,  but  the  Council  of  Virginia  endorsed  all 
his  actions  and  the  people  dared  not  disobey. 

And  so  the  trials  and  executions  of  the  wretched  rebels  I 
continued.  As  a  result,  no  doubt,  of  the  protests  of  the  com- 
missioners, the  proceedings  of  the  court  martial  were  closed, 
and  the  accused  were  now  examined  before  the  court  of  oyer 
and  terminer.^®  Gyles  Bland,  who  for  some  months  had  been 
a  prisoner  aboard  the  Adam  and  Eve,  was  now  made  to  answer 
for  his  participation  in  the  Rebellion.^^  He  possessed  many 
powerful  friends  in  England,  but  their  influence  could  not 
save  him.  It  was  rumored  that  the  Duke  of  York  had  blocked 
all  efforts  in  his  behalf,  vowing  "by  God  Bacon  and  Bland 
shoud  dye".^^  Accordingly,  on  the  eighth  of  March,  he  was 
condemned,  and  seven  days  later  was  executed. ^^  Other 
trials  followed.  In  quick  succession  Robert  Stoakes,  John 
Isles,  Richard  Pomfoy,  John  Whitson  and  William  Scar- 
burgh  were  sent  to  the  scaffold. ^^  Some  of  the  GkDvernor's 
friends  expressed  fear  that  the  rabble  might  attempt  to  rescue 
these  men,  and  "Counsell'd  the  not  sending  them  to  dye  with- 
out a  strong  Guard",  but  the  people  dared  not  rise  in  their 
behalf.-*'' 

Robert  Jones  was  condemned,  but  was  saved  from  the  gal- 
lows by  the  intercession  of  Colonel  Moryson.  Jones  had  fought 
with  Charles  I  in  the  English  civil  wars,  and  now  exhibited 
the  wounds  received  in  the  service  of  the  father  as  a  plea  for 
pardon  for  his  rebellion  against  the  son.    Moryson  was  moved 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO2-39-31 ;  CO5-1371-276.  286. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-12S,  127.  '*P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-38;  CO1-41-79. 

"T.  M.,  p.  24. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-35;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  550. 

^'P.  R.  O.,  COi -39-35;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  553- 

**P.   R.   O.,   COs-1371-152. 


204  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

to  pity  at  the  plight  of  the  old  veteran  and  wrote  to  Madam 
Berkeley  requesting  her  to  intercede  for  him  with  the  Gover- 
nor.^^  "If  I  am  at  all  acquainted  with  my  heart,"  wrote  the 
Lady  in  reply,  "I  should  with  more  easinesse  of  mind  have 
worne  the  Canvas  Lynnen  the  Rebells  said  they  would  make 
me  be  glad  off,  than  have  had  this  fatal  occasion  of  interceding 
for  mercy. "^®  None  the  less  Berkeley  consented  to  reprieve 
Jones,  and  many  months  later  the  King  pardoned  him.^''' 

Anthony  Arnold,  who  had  been  one  of  the  most  active 
of  the  rebel  leaders,  boldly  defended  the  right  of  peoples  to 
resist  the  oppressions  of  their  rulers.  He  declared  that  kings 
"had  no  rights  but  what  they  gott  by  Conquest  and  the  Sword, 
and  he  that  could  by  force  of  the  Sword  deprive  them  thereof, 
had  as  good  and  just  a  Title  to  it  as  the  King  himself e.  .  .  . 
If  the  King  should  deny  to  doe  him  right  he  would  make  noe 
more  to  sheathe  his  sword  in  his  heart  or  Bowells  then  of  his 
own  mortall  Enemy es."^^  For  these  and  other  treasonable 
words  this  "horrible  resolved  Rebell  and  Traytor"  was  con- 
demned to  be  "hang'd  in  Chaines  in  his  own  County,  to  bee 
a  more  remarkable  Example  than  the  rest".^^ 

The  Governor,  even  now,  showed  no  inclination  to  put  an 
end  to  the  trials  and  executions.  No  sooner  would  the  courts 
empty  the  jails  of  prisoners  than  he  would  fill  them  up  again. 
The  unhappy  rebels,  finding  that  the  King's  pardon  gave  them 
little  protection,  and  that  Berkeley  excepted  from  it  whom  he 
wished,  could  not  know  where  next  the  axe  would  fall.^*' 
None  can  say  how  far  Sir  William  would  have  carried  his 
revenge  had  not  the  Assembly  requested  him  "to  hold  his  hand 
from  all  other  Sanguinary  punishment".^  ^  This  brought  him 
to  his  senses  and  he  consented,  though  with  extreme  reluc- 
tance, to  dismiss  his  witnesses  and  juries,  and  put  an  end  to  the 
executions.  And  even  then  "he  found  out  a  new  way"  to 
punish  his  victims,  "ffyning  some  of  their  Treasons  and  Re- 
bellions and  condemning  others  to  banishment  to  England",''^ 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-178,  179.  *•?.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-180,  181. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COi-45-3.  "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-152. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-152;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  550. 
~P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-32,  152.  "P.  R.  O.,  COS-1371-1S2. 

"*  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-152. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  205 

The  Governor's  extreme  severity  and  the  insatiable  greed 
of  the  loyal  party  brought  the  colony  to  the  verge  of  another 
rebellion.  The  people  were  deeply  angered.  Had  there  ap- 
peared any  person  to  lead  them,  "bould  and  courageous  .  .  . 
that  durst  venture  his  neck",  the  commons  were  ready  "to 
Emmire  themselves  as  deepe  in  Rebellion  as  ever  they  did  in 
Bacon's  time".^^  For  many  months  it  was  feared  that  Law- 
rence, "that  Stubborn  desperate  and  resolved  Rebell",  would 
emerge  from  seclusion  to  put  himself  at  the  head  of  a  new 
swarm  of  mutineers.^*  Were  he  to  appear  at  this  juncture,  not 
even  the  presence  of  the  English  troops  could  prevent  Bacon's 
veterans  from  flocking  to  his  standard.  "Soe  sullen  and 
obstinate"  were  the  people  that  it  was  feared  they  would 
"abandon  their  Plantacons,  putt  off  their  Servants  &  dispose 
of  their  Stock  and  away  to  other  parts".  Had  England  at 
this  juncture  become  involved  in  a  foreign  war,  the  Virginians 
would  undoubtedly  have  sought  aid  from  the  enemies  of  the 
mother  country.^^ 

Nor  could  the  people  expect  relief  or  justice  from  the 
General  Assembly  which  met  at  Green  Spring,  February  the 
twentieth,  1677.^^  The  elections  had  been  held  soon  after 
the  final  collapse  of  the  Rebellion,  amid  the  general  terror 
inspired  by  the  numerous  executions,  and  had  resulted  in  an 
overwhelming  victory  for  the  loyalists.  In  many  counties, 
staunch  friends  of  the  Governor  had  been  put  in  nomination, 
and  the  commons  given  an  opportunity  of  showing  the  sincer- 
ity of  their  repentance  by  electing  them  to  the  Assembly.  Wil- 
liam Sherwood  declared  that  most  of  the  Burgesses  were 
Berkeley's  "owne  Creatures  &  choase  by  his  appointments 
before  the  arrivall  of  the  Commissioners".^'^  In  several  places 
fraud  as  well  as  intimidation  seems  to  have  been  used  to  secure 
the  election  of  loyalists.  The  commons  of  Charles  City  com- 
plained that  there  had  been  illegal  voting  in  their  county  and 
seventy  of  them  signed  a  petition,  demanding  a  new  election, 
which  they  posted  upon  the  court  house  door.^^     That  the 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-88.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-132. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-32.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-35. 

»'P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-43.  "'P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-73,  106. 


2o6  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

^  Assembly  was  in  no  sense  representative  of  the  people  seems 
to  have  been  recognized  even  in  England,  for  some  of  the' 
King's  ministers  declared  that  it  had  been  "called  when  ye 
Country  was  yet  remaining  under  great  distractions,  and  un- 
capable  of  making  their  Elections  after  ye  usual  manner".^'* 

(  Certain  it  is,  that  the  House  of  Burgesses  as  well  as  the 
Council,  was  filled  with  ardent  loyalists  and  friends  of  the 
Governor.  They  passed  several  acts  confirming  all  Berkeley's 
recent  measures,  and  inflicting  further  punishment  upon  the 
luckless  rebels. ^^  Some  that  had  escaped  the  gallows  were 
forced  to  pay  heavy  fines,  others  were  banished.^^  Many  were 
compelled  to  make  humble  submission,  with  ropes  around  their 
necks,  upon  their  knees  before  the  Governor  or  the  county 
magistrates.  Large  sums  of  money  were  voted  to  reward  the 
most  active  of  Berkeley's  supporters.  All  that  had  held 
command  among  the  rebels,  even  Ingram  and  Walkelett,  were 
made  forever  "incapable  of  any  office  civil  or  military  in  Vir- 
ginia". To  speak  ill  of  the  Governor  and  Council  or  of  the 
justices  of  the  peace,  was  declared  a  high  crime,  punishable  by 
whipping.  If  the  people,  to  the  number  of  six,  assembled  in 
arms,  they  were  to  be  considered  mutineers  and  rebels.  And 
the  Burgesses  showed  great  reluctance  to  reduce  their  own 
salaries,  which  the  people  considered  so  excessive.  The  Gov- 
ernor feared  to  insist  upon  it,  "least  perhaps  he  might  thereby 
disobHge  and  thwart  his  own  ends  and  interest  in  the  Assem- 
bly", and  only  the  positive  commands  of  the  King,  delivered  to 
them  by  the  commissioners,  could  induce  them  to  make  any 
reduction  at  all.^^ 

They  passed  resolutions  praising  the  wisdom,  the  bravery, 
the  justice  and  integrity  of  the  Governor,  and  exonerating 
him  for  all  blame  for  the  outbreak  of  the  Rebellion."*  "The 
distempered  humor  predominant  in  the  Common  people",  which 
had  occasioned  the  insurrection,  they  declared  the  result  of 
false  rumors  "inspired  by  ill  afifected  persons,  provoking  an 
itching  desire  in  them  to  pry  into  the  secrets  of  the  grand 

'"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-40-114.  ~P.  R.  O.,  COI-39-3S. 

••  P.  R.  O..  COI-39-3S. 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-168  to  17s ;  COi-39-35. 
"P.  R.  O.,  COi-39-38. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  207 

assembly".^*    They  snubbed  the  King's  commissioners,  reply-  • 
ing  to  their  request  for  assistance  in  discovering  the  common  I 
grievances  that  the  Assembly  alone  was  the  proper  body  to  I 
correct  the  people's  wrongs.^^     Yet  when  the  commons  did  / 
come  to  the  Burgesses  with  their  complaints  they  were  repulsed  ) 
with  harsh  reproofs  and  even  severe  punishment.     Certain 
grievances   from  Isle  of  Wight  county  were  denounced  as 
"libellous,   Scandalous  and  rebellious"   and  "the  chiefe  per- 
sons in  the  Subscriptions"  were  to  be  punished  "to  the  merits 
of  their  Crymes".®*     A  petition  from  Gloucester  county  was 
declared  to  savor  so  strongly  of  the  "old  leaven  of  rebellion" 
that  it  must  be  expunged  from  the  records.    When  the  people 
of  Nansemond  appealed  for  a  more  just  method  of  taxation, 
they  were  answered  briefly,  "It  is  conceived  the  pole  is  the 
equallest  way."^"^ 

One  is  inclined  to  wonder  why  the  people,  thus  finding  the 
Assembly  but  an  instrument  of  oppression  in  the  Governor's 
hands,  did  not  turn  eagerly  for  support  and  relief  to  the  King's 
commissioners.  These  men  had  invited  them  to  bring  in  all 
their  pressures,  without  restraint  or  fear  of  punishment.  His 
Majesty,  they  announced,  was  anxious  to  know  what  had 
caused  them  to  rise  against  his  authority.  All  just  complaints 
would  be  carefully  considered  and  all  grievances  redressed.** 
But  dread  of  Sir  William's  anger  held  the  people  back.  Their  \ 
chief  grievance  was  the  old  Governor  himself,  but  there  were 
few  that  dared  say  so,  even  with  the  promise  of  the  King's 
protection.  The  commissioners  wrote  Secretary  Coventry  that 
until  "the  awe  of  his  stay"  was  removed,  they  could  "never 
thoroughly  search  and  penetrate  into  the  bottome  of  the  Busi- 
nesse".^^  Berkeley,  they  said,  continually  impeded  their  in- 
vestigations and  prevented  the  people  from  testifying.  It 
might  be  necessary  for  Colonel  Jeffreys  to  send  him  home, 
before  the  mists  he  cast  before  them  could  be  dispelled.'^" 
When  he  was  gone,  a  short  time  would  show  boldly  those 
things  that  as  yet  only  cautiously  peeped  forth.  ^^ 

•*  P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -39-38.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COi -39-39. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO  I -39-38.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-39-38. 

•*  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-39  to  44.  ••  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-132. 

™  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-182,  187.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-193  to  198. 


208  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

The  violent  opposition  which  the  commissioners  encountered 
from  the  Governor  and  the  loyalists  soon  forced  them  to  be- 
come the  leaders  of  the  defeated  party.  The  poor  people  looked 
forward  with  hope  to  the  day  when  Sir  William  would  leave 
and  Colonel  Jeffreys  assume  control  of  the  executive.  Then, 
they  were  sure,  the  persecutions  would  end  and  justice  be 
done  them. 

The  hatred  and  contempt  of  the  Governor's  friends  for 
Colonel  Jeffreys  and  his  colleagues  is  shown  by  an  interesting 
and  unique  incident.  Having  heard  that  Sir  William  was  at 
last  preparing  to  sail  for  England,  they  went  to  Green  Spring, 
on  the  twenty-second  of  April,  to  bid  him  farewell.'^^  This 
they  thought  due  his  dignity  and  rank,  even  though  their  re- 
lations with  him  had  been  far  from  cordial.'^^  As  they  left 
the  house,  after  paying  their  respects  to  the  Governor  and  his 
lady,  they  found  Sir  William's  coach  waiting  at  the  door  to  con- 
vey them  to  their  landing. ''^^  But  before  they  rode  away  a 
strange  man  came  forward,  boldly  putting  aside  the  "Postillion 
that  used  to  Ryde"  and  got  up  himself  in  his  place.  The  Gov- 
ernor, several  Councillors,  and  others  saw  what  occurred,  but 
did  not  offer  to  interfere.  Lady  Berkeley  went  "into  her 
Chamber,  and  peep'd  through  a  broken  quarrell  of  the  Glass, 
to  observe  how  the  Show  look'd".'^^  After  reaching  their  boat, 
the  commissioners  found  to  their  horror  that  the  strange 
postilion  was  none  other  than  the  "Common  Hangman 
that  .  .  .  put  the  Halters  about  the  Prisoner's  Necks  in  Court 
when  they  were  to  make  their  submission".  This  seemed 
to  them  so  gross  an  insult,  not  only  to  the  "Great  Seal",  but 
to  their  "persons  as  Gentlemen",  that  they  were  resolved  to 
make  his  Majesty  himself  acquainted  with  it.'^®  "The  whole 
country  rings  of  .  .  .  the  public  Odium  and  disgrace  cast 
upon  us,"  they  said,  "as  the  Exchange  itselfe  shortly  may."^''' 

It  is  probable  that  Lady  Berkeley  alone  was  responsible  for 
this  incident,  which,  as  the  commissioners  themselves  said, 
looked  "more  like  a  woman's  than  a  man's  malice". '^^     The 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-208  to  211,  "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-212,  213. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-220,  231.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-220,  231. 

'•P.  R.  O.,  005-1371-212,  213.  "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-220,  231. 
"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1371-220,  231. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  209 

Governor  denied  with  passionate  vehemence  that  he  was  in 
any  way  guiUy.  "I  have  sent  the  Negro"^^  to  be  Rebuked, 
Tortur'd  or  whipt,  till  he  con f esse  how  this  dire  misfortune 
happen'd,"  he  wrote  the  commissioners,  "but  I  am  soe  dis- 
tracted that  I  scarce  know  what  I  doe."®** 

Even   before    Berkeley   left   the   colony    Colonel    Jeffreys 
issued  a  proclamation,  formally  taking  possession  of  the  gov- 
ernment.®^    For  some   time  it  had  been   apparent  that  the 
Lieutenant-Governor's  long  delay  in  entering  upon  his  duties/ 
was  greatly  weakening  him  in  the  estimation  of  the  people.! 
Since  he  had  been  forced  to  sit  idly  by  for  several  months  while  A 
Sir  William  carried  to  completion  matters  of  the  utmost  impor- 
tance, and  had  not  dared  to  take  his  office  so  long  as  it  pleased  I 
the  old  man  to  linger  in  the  colony,  many  thought,  quite  natur-  I 
ally,  that  he  could  not  have  been  entrusted  with  full  authority   I 
to  act  as  Governor.     And  this  opinion  had  been  industriously    \ 
furthered  by  the  loyal  party.     The  departure  of  Sir  William,    \ 
they  declared,  did  not  mean  a  permanent  change  of  adminis-    \ 
tration.     Jeffreys  was  to  act  only  as  his  deputy  during  his 
absence  and  would  retire  upon  his  return.®^    Feeling  that  these 
views,  if  universally  accepted,  would  undermine  his  influence 
and  authority,  Jeffreys  entered  a  vigorous  denial  in  his  pro- 
clamation.    He  had  been  appointed,  he  declared,  to  exercise 
the  power  of  Governor,  as  fully  as  Berkeley  or  any  of  his  pre- 
decessors had  done.     No  man  should  dare  to  belittle  his  office 
or  authority.    Berkeley  was  going  home  at  his  own  request  be- 
cause his  great  age  and  infirmities  rendered  him  unfit  to  sustain 
further  the  burdens  of  his  position.     The  new  executive  had 
refrained  from  assuming  his  duties  earlier,  "because  an  As- 
sembly being  .  .  .  ready  to  convene,  the  issueing  forth  a  new 
Summons  .  .  .  must   needs   have  greatly   retarded   the   pub- 
lique  Weale".®^     Nor  did  he  scruple  to  claim  the  full  title  of 
"Governour  and  Captain  Generall  of  Virginia". 

This  proclamation  aroused  Berkeley's  deepest  ire.     "Your 
ejecting  me,"  he  wrote  Jeffreys,  "from  having  any  share  in 

"  Probably   the   real   postilion.  **  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-214  to  217. 

"  This  proclamation  was  issued  April  27,  1677.     P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-40-53. 
^^P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-121;  COi-42-23.    "^P.  R.  O.,  CO1-40-53. 


2IO  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

the  Government  whilst  yet  I  am  in  the  Countrey  ...  I  be- 
leeve  can  neither  be  justified  by  your  Comision  nor  mine." 
"You  say  that  his  Majesty  out  of  the  knowledge  of  my  inability 
to  govern  did  surrogate  so  able  a  man  as  Coll :  Jeffreys  to 
supply  my  defects.  I  wish  from  my  heart  Coll :  Jeffreys  were 
as  well  known  to  the  King  and  Counsel  as  Sir  William  Berkeley 
is,  for  then  the  difference  would  be  quickly  decided."  The 
letter  was  addressed  to  the  "Right  honorable  Coll:  Herbert 
Jeffreys,  his  Majesty's  Lieutenant  Governor  of  Virginia",  and 
was  signed  "William  Berkeley,  Governor  of  Virginia  till  his 
most  Sacred  Majesty  shall  please  to  determine  otherwise".^* 

In  the  meanwhile  the  letters  of  the  commissioners,  reporting 
Berkeley's  disobedience  to  the  King's  commands,  had  arrived 
in  England.  Charles  was  angered,  not  only  at  his  delay  in 
surrendering  the  government,  but  also  at  his  presumption  in 
disregarding  the  royal  proclamation  of  pardon.  "You  may 
well  think,"  he  wrote  Berkeley,  "we  are  not  a  little  surprised 
to  understand  that  you  make  difficulty  to  yield  obedience  to  our 
commands,  being  so  clear  and  plain  that  we  thought  no  man 
could  have  raised  any  dispute  about  them.  Therefore  ...  we 
do  .  .  .  command  you  forthwith  .  .  .  without  further  delay 
or  excuse  (to)  repair  unto  our  Presence  as  We  formerly 
required  you."^^ 

Secretary  Coventry  wrote  even  more  severely.  We  under- 
stand, he  said,  that  to  the  King's  clear  and  positive  orders  for 
you  to  resign  the  government  to  Colonel  Jeffreys,  "upon  certain 
pretences  which  are  no  wayes  understood  here,  you  have  de- 
layed at  least  if  not  refused  obedience.  .  .  .  His  Majesty  .  .  . 
seemeth  not  a  little  surprised  as  well  as  troubled  to  find  a 
person  that  had  for  so  many  years  served  his  Royal  Father 
and  himself  through  ye  worst  of  times  with  so  unshaken  a 
loyalty,  and  so  absolute  obedience  and  resignation,  should  now 
at  one  time  fall  into  two  such  great  errors  as  to  affront  his 
Proclamation  by  putting  out  one  of  his  owne  at  ye  same  time 
with  his,  and  in  that  to  exempt  several  persons  from  pardon, 
which  were  by  the  King's  owne  Proclamation  made  capable 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO  1-40-54. 

"This  letter  was  written  May  13,  1677. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  211 

of  Pardon;  then  after  positive  orders  given  for  your  immediate 
return  .  .  .  you  yet  stay  there  .  .  .  and  continually  dispute 
with  his  Majesty's  commissioners.  I  will  assure  you,  Sir,  his 
Majesty  is  very  sensible  of  these  miscarriages,  and  hath  very 
little  hopes  that  ye  people  of  Virginia  shall  be  brought  to  a 
right  sense  of  their  duty  to  obey  their  Governours  when  the 
Governours  themselves  will  not  obey  the  King,  I  pray  you, 
Sir,  .  .  .  take  not  councell  from  your  owne  nor  any  other 
body's  passion  or  resentment,  to  take  upon  you  to  judge  either 
•conveniency  or  not  conveniency  of  the  King's  orders,  but  obey 
them,  and  come  over ;  and  whatever  you  have  to  say  .  .  .  you 
will  be  heard  at  large."^^ 

Even  before  these  letters  were  written  Sir  William  had  left 
the  colony.  He  had  embarked  for  England,  May  the  fifth, 
in  Captain  Larrimore's  sturdy  ship  which  had  stood  him  in  ' 
such  good  stead  in  the  hour  of  need.*'^  But  the  old  man,  worn 
out  by  his  violent  passions  and  unusual  exertions,  was  phys- 
ically unfit  for  the  long  voyage  across  the  Atlantic.  He  became 
very  ill  on  shipboard,  and  reached  England  a  dying  man. 
"He  came  here  alive,"  wrote  Secretary  Coventry,  "but  so 
unlike  to  live  that  it  had  been  very  inhumane  to  have  troubled 
him  with  any  interrogacons."^^  The  news  of  the  King's  dis-  \ 
pleasure  at  his  conduct  added  much  to  his  sufifering.  He 
pleaded  for  an  opportunity  "to  clear  his  Innocency"  even 
though  the  "tedious  passage  &  griefe  of  mind"  had  reduced 
him  "to  extreame  weaknesse".^^  That  Charles  did  not  refuse 
him  this  privilege  is  attested  by  a  letter  written  to  Berkeley  by 
Secretary  Coventry,  "I  am  commanded  by  his  Majesty,"  he 
said,  "to  let  you  know  that  his  Majesty  would  speake  with  you 
as  soone  as  you  can,  because  there  are  some  ships  now  going 
to  Virginia,  and  his  Majesty  would  see  what  further  Instruc- 
tions may  be  necessary  to  be  sent  by  them,"^*'  But  Berkeley 
could  not  attend  the  King,  either  to  give  information  or  to  plead 
his  own  cause.  His  condition  rapidly  became  critical,  and  a 
few  days  later  he  died.^^ 

*•  P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-195  to  198.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COi-40-88. 

''P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6.  ''P.  R.  O.,  CO1-40-110. 

••P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-207.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-210. 


212  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Hardly  had  Sir  William  breathed  his  last  than  Thomas 
Lord  Culpeper  "kissed  the  King's  hand  as  Governour".®^ 
This  nobleman  had  received  a  commission,  July  8,  1675,  which 
was  to  take  effect  immediately  upon  the  death,  surrender  or 
forfeiture  of  the  office  by  Berkeley.^^  It  had  never  been 
Charles'  intention  that  Colonel  Jeffreys  should  remain  per- 
manently at  the  head  of  the  government  of  Virginia,  and  he 
now  notified  him  to  prepare  to  surrender  his  office  to  the  new 
Governor.^^  The  King,  who  felt  that  the  unsettled  condition 
of  Virginia  required  Culpeper's  immediate  presence,  ordered 
him  to  depart  "with  all  speed",  and  told  the  colonists  they 
might  expect  him  by  Christmas  "without  fayle".^^  But  this 
pampered  lord,  accustomed  to  the  luxury  of  the  court,  had  no 
desire  to  be  exiled  in  the  wilderness  of  the  New  World.  By 
various  excuses  he  succeeded  in  postponing  his  departure  for 
over  two  years,  and  it  was  not  until  the  spring  of  1680  that 
he  landed  in  Virginia.^^  Thus,  for  a  while,  Colonel  Jeffreys 
was  left  as  the  chief  executive  of  the  colony. 

In  the  meanwhile  the  commissioners,  freed  from  the  baleful 
presence  of  the  old  Governor,  were  continuing  their  investiga- 
tion into  the  causes  of  the  Rebellion.  Berkeley  had  advised 
them,  when  they  first  announced  their  mission,  to  carry  out 
their  work  through  the  county  courts. ^"^  But  they  had  re- 
fused to  accept  this  plan.  The  justices  were  almost  all  hench- 
men of  Sir  William,  many  were  hated  by  the  people  and 
some  were  the  objects  of  their  chief  accusations.  Had 
the  investigation  been  intrusted  to  their  hands,  they  would 
most  certainly  have  suppressed  the  principal  complaints.^^ 
The  commissioners,  therefore,  appointed  especial  officers  in  the 
counties  to  hear  the  people's  grievances,  draw  them  up  in  writ- 
ing and  bring  them  in  for  presentation  to  the  King.^®     Even 

"^  P.  R.  O.,  €0389.6-212. 

»*?.  R.  O.,  CO5-1355-299;  CO389.6-271  to  273. 

»*  P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-210,  215.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO389.6-210. 

-  P.  R.  o.,  cos-1355-377.  "  P.  R.  o.,  CO5-1371-45. 

**  Nothing  can  show  this  more  clearly  than  the  reception  in  the  Assembly, 
which  was  largely  composed  of  justices  of  the  peace,  of  the  county 
grievances. 

-  P.  R.  O.,  C039i.2-i8o. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  213 

then  the  loyal  party  attempted,  by  intimidation,  to  prevent  the 
commons  from  explaining  without  reserve  what  had  caused 
them  to  take  up  arms  against  the  government.  Sir  William, 
they  were  careful  to  report,  would  most  certainly  return,  and 
any  that  dared  charge  him  or  his  friends  with  corruption  might 
expect  the  severest  punishment.  ^^^  But  the  announcement  by 
the  commissioners  that  his  Majesty  himself  had  promised  his 
protection  to  all  informants  relieved  the  fears  of  the  people 
and  many  came  forward  with  the  story  of  their  wrongs. ^^* 
These  seem  to  have  been  faithfully  drawn  up  by  the  officers' 
and  in  time  presented  to  the  King. 

The  loyal  party  complained  loudly  that  the  commissioners 
used  in  this  matter  none  but  the  enemies  of  the  Governor.^®* 
Lord  John  Berkeley  declared  that  they  had  sought  information 
from  such  only  as  were  known  "to  be  notorious  actors  in  the 
rebellion". ^^^  But  the  commissioners  were  undoubtedly  right 
in  insisting  that  all  grievances  should  come  from  those  that 
had  been  aggrieved.  They  themselves,  they  declared,  were  not 
responsible  for  the  truth  of  the  charges;  their  function  was 
only  to  receive  and  report  them.  The  King  had  sent  them  to 
Virginia  to  make  the  royal  ear  accessible  to  the  humblest 
citizen.  This  could  be  done  only  by  brushing  aside  the  usual 
channels  of  information  and  going  directly  to  the  commons 
themselves.  That  some  of  the  accusations  were  exaggerated 
or  even  entirely  false  seems  not  improbable;  many  were  un- 
doubtedly true.  Posterity  must  accept  them,  not  as  the  rela- 
tion of  established  truth,  but  as  the  charges  of  a  defeated  and 
exasperated  party. 

In  their  work  of  investigation  the  commissioners  found 
that  they  had  need  of  the  records  of  the  House  of  Burgesses. 
In  April,  1677,  after  the  adjournment  of  the  session  at  Green 
Spring,  they  came  to  Major  Robert  Beverley,  the  clerk  of  the 
Assembly,  and  demanded  "all  the  Originall  Journals,  Orders, 
Acts",  etc.,  then  in  his  custody. ^^*  Beverley  required  them  to 
show  their  authority,  and  this  they  did,  by  giving  him  a  sight 

^~P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-132.  ^'^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1371-132. 

"'P.  R.  O.,  CO391.2-180;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  pp.  259,  260. 
"^  P.  R.  O.,  CO391.2-173  to  178;  Burk,  Vol.  II,  p.  260. 
"^  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-87. 


214  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

!  of  that  part  of  their  commission  which  concerned  his  delivery 
'  of  the  records.  ^^^  He  then  offered  to  allow  them  to  examine 
any  of  the  papers  necessary  to  the  investigation,  but  he  refused 
absolutely  to  relinquish  their  custody.  ^^®  The  commissioners, 
who  distrusted  Beverley  and  perhaps  feared  that  he  might 
conceal  the  records,  "took  them  from  him  by  violence". ^"^ 

When  the  Assembly  met  in  October,  1677,  the  House  of 
Burgesses  sent  a  vigorous  protest  to  Colonel  Jeffreys  against 
these  proceedings  of  the  commissioners.  Their  action,  they 
declared,  "we  take  to  be  a  great  violation  of  our  privileges'*. 
The  power  to  command  the  records  which  the  commissioners 
claim  to  have  received  from  the  King,  "this  House  humbly 
suppose  His  Majesty  would  not  grant  or  Comand,  for  that 
they  find  not  the  same  to  have  been  practiced  by  any  of  the 
Kings  of  England  in  the  likewise.  .  .  .  The  House  do  hum- 
bly pray  your  Honour  .  .  .  will  please  to  give  the  House 
such  satisfaction,  that  they  may  be  assured  no  such  violation 
of  their  privileges  shall  be  offered  for  the  future."^**^ 

When  Charles  H  heard  of  this  bold  protest  he  was  sur- 
prised and  angered.  It  seemed  to  him  a  "great  presumption 
of  ye  said  Assembly  ...  to  call  in  Question"  his  authority. ^^^ 
Referring  their  representation  to  the  Lords  of  Trade  and 
Plantations,  he  directed  them  "to  examine  ye  same,  &  to 
Report"  what  they  thought  "fitt  to  be  done  in  Vindication 
of  .  .  .  (the)  Roy  all  Authority,  &  for  bringing  the  said  As- 
sembly to  a  due  sence  &  acknowledgement  of  their  Duty  & 
Submission". ^^^  The  Lords  gave  it  as  their  opinion  that  the 
declaration  was  so  "Seditious,  even  tending  to  Rebellion",  that 
the  new  Governor  should  be  directed  to  rebuke  the  Assembly 
and  punish  the  "authors  and  abettors  of  this  presumption".^^^ 
The  King  commanded  Lord  Culpeper  to  carry  these  recom- 
mendations into  effect.  On  the  third  of  July,  1680,  Culpeper 
brought  the  matter  before  the  Virginia  Council,  preparatory 
to  delivering  the  rebuke.  But  the  Councillors  made  a  vigorous 
defense  of  the  action  of  the  Assembly,  and  unanimously  ad- 

'•*  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-138.  '"•  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1376-273. 

**'P.  R.  O.,  COs-1376-273.  ""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-87. 

"**P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-141.  ""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-141. 
*"P.  R.  O.,  CO391 .2-300,  301. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  215 

vised  the  Governor  to  suspend  the  execution  of  the  King's 
command. ^^^  After  some  hesitation,  Culpeper  yielded,  and  the 
matter  was  referred  back  to  the  Privy  Council.  Charles  wasi 
finally  induced  to  rescind  the  order,  but  he  insisted  that  all 
reference  to  the  declaration  "be  taken  off  the  file  and  razed  out 
of  the  books  of  Virginia". ^^^ 

The  work  of  the  commission  being  completed,  Berry  and 
Moryson,  in  July,  1677,  sailed  with  the  royal  squadron  for 
England. ^^"^  Their  report,  which  was  so  damaging  to  the 
Virginia  loyalists,  was  not  allowed  to  go  unchallenged.  Sir 
William  Berkeley,  upon  his  death  bed,  had  told  his  brother, 
Lord  John  Berkeley,  of  the  hostility  of  the  commissioners,  and 
charged  him  to  defend  his  conduct  and  character.  And  Lord 
Berkeley,  who  was  a  member  of  the  Privy  Council  and  a  man 
of  great  influence,  did  his  best  to  refute  their  evidence  and  to 
discredit  them  before  the  King.^^''  Their  entire  report,  he 
declared,  was  "a  scandalous  lible  and  invective  of  Sir  Wil- 
liam .  .  .  and  the  royal  party  in  Virginia". ^^^  His  brother's 
conduct  had  been  always  prudent  and  just,  and  it  was  notice- 
able that  not  one  private  grievance  had  ever  been  brought 
against  him  before  this  rebellion.^^^  The  meetings  of  Lord 
Berkeley  with  the  commissioners  in  the  Council  chamber  were 
sometimes  stormy.  On  one  occasion  he  told  Berry,  "with  an 
angry  voice  and  a  Berklean  look,  .  .  .  that  he  and  Morryson 
had  murdered  his  brother".  "Sir  John  as  sharply  returned 
again"  that  they  had  done  nothing  but  What  they  "durst 
justify".ii8 

As  the  other  members  of  the  Privy  Council  protected  the 
commissioners,  and  upheld  their  report,  the  attacks  of  the  angry 
nobleman  availed  nothing.  Secretary  Coventry  averred  that 
Berry  and  Moryson  had  been  most  faithful  in  carrying  out  the 
King's  directions,  and  he  showed  his  confidence  in  their  honesty 
and  their  judgment  by  consulting  them  upon  all  important 
matters  relating  to  the  colony. ^^^     And   for  a  while,   their 

^''P.  R.  O.,  COs-1355-354.  "'Sains.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  129. 

"*P.  R.  O,  CO1-41-17.  "'Burk,  Vol.  II,  p.  263. 

"•Burk,  Vol.  II,  p.  259;  P.  R  O.,  CO391.2-180. 

"'  Burk,  Vol.    II,   p.   264.  "*  Burk,  Vol.  II,  p.  266. 

«*P.  R.  O.,  CO391 .2-180. 


2ii6  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

influence  in  shaping  the  poHcy  of  the  Privy  Council  in  regard 
to  Virginia  was  almost  unlimited, 
[  Nor  did  they  scruple  to  use  this  great  power  to  avenge  them- 
I  selves  upon  those  men  that  had  so  antagonized  them  and  hin- 
I  dered  their  investigation.  Robert  Beverley  they  represented 
to  the  Privy  Council  as  a  man  of  low  education  and  mean  parts, 
bred  a  vulgar  seaman  and  utterly  unfit  for  high  office.  ^^*' 
Colonel  Edward  Hill  was  the  most  hated  man  in  Charles 
City  county. ^^^  Ballard,  Bray  and  some  of  the  other  Coun- 
cillors were  rash  and  fiery,  active  in  opposing  the  King's  orders 
and  unjust  to  the  poor  people.^^^  The  Privy  Council  was  so 
greatly  influenced  by  these  representations  that  they  determined 
to  reconstruct  the  Virginia  Council,  upon  lines  suggested  by 
Berry  and  Moryson.  Colonel  Philip  Ludwell,  Colonel  Bal- 
lard and  Colonel  Bray  were  expressly  excluded  from  the  Coun- 
cil, while  Colonel  Hill  and  Major  Beverley  as  "men  of  evil 
fame  and  behavior"  were  deprived  of  all  governmental  em- 
ployment whatsoever,  and  "declared  unfit  to  serve  His  Ma- 
jesty".^^^  On  the  other  hand.  Colonel  Thomas  Swann,  who 
had  been  excluded  from  the  Council  by  Governor  Berkeley, 
was  now,  for  his  kindness  to  the  commissioners,  restored  to 
his  seat.^^^ 

The  departure  of  Sir  William  Berkeley  by  no  means  ended 
the  opposition  to  Colonel  Jeffreys.  A  part  of  the  Council, 
realizing  that  continued  hostility  could  result  only  in  harm  to 
/  themselves,  made  their  peace  with  the  new  administration,  and 
were  received  into  favor,  but  the  more  violent  of  the  loyal 
party  remained  defiant  and  abusive.  Philip  Ludwell,  Beverley, 
Hill,  Ballard  and  others  openly  denounced  Jeffreys  as  a  weak- 
ling, entirely  unsuited  for  the  important  office  he  now  occupied, 
and  did  their  best  to  render  him  unpopular  with  the  people.^^^ 
The  Lieutenant-Governor  retaliated  with  considerable  spirit, 
depriving  some  of  their  lucrative  offices,  and  suspending  others 

"*  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-121.  Major  Beverley  was  of  good  family.  His 
military  leadership  in  Bacon's  Rebellion,  and  his  services  as  clerk  of 
the  Assembly,  testify  to  his  ability.    Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  p.  405. 

'"  P.   R.  O.,   CO1-41-121.  "» P.  R.  O..  CO391.2-173  to  178. 

^P.  R.  O.,  CO391.2-305.  "^P.  R.  O.,  CO391.2-173  to  178. 

""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-138;  CO1-42-117. 


\ 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  217 

from  the  Council,  Ludwell,  whose  conduct  had  been  espe- 
cially obnoxious,  was  ousted  from  the  collectorship  of  York 
River/^*  Ballard  was  expelled  from  a  similar  office.^-'  And 
many  months  before  the  changes  in  the  Council  ordered  by  the 
English  government  became  known  in  Virginia,  no  less  than 
six  of  the  most  active  loyalists  had  been  suspended  by  the 
Lieutenant-Governor.^  2^ 

But  events  soon  took  a  more  favorable  turn  for  the  Ber-  . 
keley  party.     The  departure  of  Berry  and  Moryson  deprived  [ 
Jeffreys  of  his  staunchest  friends  and  advisors.     And,  before    I 
the  end  of  the  summer,  he  was  prostrated  by  the  Virginia    j 
sickness,  which  was  still  deadly  to  those  unaccustomed  to  the 
climate  of  the  colony.     For  several  months  he  was  too  ill  to 
attend  properly  to  his  duties  or  to  resist  the  machinations  of  / 
his  enemies,  and  the  government  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Council.*^®    And  since  this  body,  despite  its  pretended  support 
of  the  Lieutenant-Governor,  was  at  heart  in  full  sympathy  with 
Beverley  and  Ludwell  and  the  other  loyalists,  the  policy  of  the 
administration  was  once  more  changed.     The  work  of  extor-  1 
tion  was  actively  resumed  and  the  courts  again  busied  them-  \ 
selves  with  suits  against  the  former  rebels. ^^'^ 

But  consternation  seized  the  Green  Spring  faction,  as  the 
loyalists  were  now  called,  upon  the  arrival  of  the  King's 
order,  annulling  Berkeley's  proclamation  of  February  10,  1677, 
and  reaffirming  the  general  pardon.^^^  If  this  command  were 
put  into  effect,  most  of  the  confiscations  secured  since  the 
Rebellion,  would  become  illegal,  and  restitution  would  have 
to  be  made.  So  desperately  opposed  to  this  were  the  loyalists  \ 
that  they  resolved  to  suppress  the  King's  letter.  They  be- 
lieved that  it  had  been  obtained  by  the  influence  of  the  com- 
missioners, and  this,  they  hoped,  would  soon  be  rendered 
nugatory  by  the  presence  at  court  of  Sir  William  Berkeley. 
If  they  could  keep  the  order  secret  for  a  few  weeks,  new  in- 
structions, dictated  by  the  Governor,  might  arrive  to  render 

"•Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  18;  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-5S. 
"^  Sains.,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  19.  "*  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-41-121. 

^^  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-17.1,  23.  '"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-42-23. 

'''P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-17.1,  23. 


2i8  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STyARTS 

1  its  execution  unnecessary.  Colonel  Jeffreys  protested  against 
I  their  disobedience,  but  he  was  too  weak  to  oppose  the  will  of 
the  Council. ^^^  So,  for  six  weeks,  his  Majesty's  grace  "was 
unknown  to  ye  poore  Inhabitants",  while  the  innumerable 
suits  and  prosecutions  were  pushed  vigorously.  Not  until 
/October  the  twenty-sixth,  when  all  hope  of  its  revocation  had 
been  dispelled  by  fresh  information  from  England,  did  the 
Council  consent  to  the  publication  of  the  letter.  ^^^ 

In  September,  1677,  writs  were  issued  for  an  election  of 

I  Burgesses. ^^^  Had  Jeffreys  not  been  ill,  he  would  perhaps 
have  refused  to  allow  a  new  session  of  the  Assembly.  The 
contest  at  the  polls  could  but  result  in  a  victory  for  the  Green 
Spring  faction,  as  the  electoral  machinery  was  in  their  hands. 
The  Lieutenant-Governor,  although  he  had  removed  some  of  the 
higher  colonial  officials,  had  made  few  changes  in  the  personnel 
of  the  county  courts. ^^^  The  sheriffs,  by  resorting  to  the  old 
methods,  made  sure  of  the  election  of  most  of  the  nominees 
of  the  loyal  party.  Complaints  came  from  James  City  county, 
New  Kent  county  and  other  places  that  intimidation  and  fraud 
had  been  used  to  deprive  the  people  of  a  fair  election. ^^®  If  we 
may  believe  the  testimony  of  William  Sherwood,  the  Berkeley 
faction  carried  things  with  a  high  hand.  "The  Inhabitants  of 
James  City  County,"  he  wrote,  "did  unanimously  elect  me  a 
Burgess  .  .  .  but  several  of  my  professed  enemies  .  .  .  pro- 
cured another  writt  for  a  new  election,  with  a  positive  command 
not  to  choose  me.  The  people  then  being  under  amazement 
consented  to  whome  soever  the  Sheriffe  would  returne,  &  so 
my  enemies  to  make  their  party  the  stronger  in  ye  house  .  .  . 
causd  three  Burgesses  to  serve  for  James  City  County. "^^'^ 

"By  this  means,"  wrote  Colonel  Daniel  Parke,  "and  by  per- 
suading the  burgesses  that  Sir  William  Berkeley  was  coming 
in  Governour  again,  (the  loyal  party)  got  all  confirmed  that 
was  done  at  the  Assembly  before  held  at  Greene  Spring."^^^ 
In  order  to  compensate  themselves  for  their  great  losses  and 
to  fulfil  the  promises  made  by  Berkeley  to  his  followers  during 

*"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-17.1,  23.  ^^'P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-17.1. 

'"P.  R.  O.,  COi-42-23.  ^''P.  R.  O.,  COi-42-23. 

"•P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-17.1.  "'P.  R.  O.,  COi-42-23. 

'"P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-17.1. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  219 

the  Rebellion,  they  levied  a  tax  upon  the  people  of  one  hun- 
dred and  ten  pounds  of  tobacco  per  poll.  "This  with  the 
county  tax  and  parish  tax,"  said  Parke,  "is  in  some  counties 
25olbs,  in  some  300,  and  in  some  40olbs,  which  falls  very 
heavie  upon  the  poorer  people."  The  county  grievances  were 
again  rejected  by  the  Burgesses  as  false  and  scandalous,  and 
the  persons  presenting  them  were  severely  punished.^^^  But 
the  Assembly  expressed  an  earnest  desire  to  bring  about  a 
reconciliation  between  the  hostile  factions  in  the  colony,  and 
prescribed  a  heavy  penalty  for  the  use  of  such  opprobrious 
epithets  as  "traytor,  Rebell  Rougue,  Rebell",  etc.^^** 

The  news  of  Berkeley's  death  was  a  severe  blow  to  the  I 
Green  Spring  party.  All  the  hope  they  had  entertained  that  ' 
he  would  accomplish  the  overthrow  of  the  work  of  the  com- 
missioners, at  once  fell  to  the  ground.  But  thev  were  some- 
what consoled  by  the  appointment  of  Lord  Culpeper.  This 
nobleman  was  related  to  Lady  Berkeley,  and  they  had  good 
reason  to  believe  he  would  reverse  the  policy  of  the  present 
administration  and  ally  himself  with  the  loyalists.^^^ 

In  the  meanwhile  the  Lieutenant-Governor  was  regaining  his 
health  and  spirits,  and  was  taking  a  more  active  part  in  public 
affairs.  He  had  been  deeply  angered  with  Colonel  Philip 
Ludwell  for  his  many  insults,  and  he  now  determined  to  prose- 
cute him  "for  scandalizing  the  Governor,  and  abusing  the 
Authority  of  his  Majesty". ^^^  Ludwell's  unpardonable  crime, 
it  would  seem,  consisted  in  calling  Jeffreys  "a  pitiful  little 
Fellow  with  a  perriwig".^'*^  He  had  also  been  heard  to  say 
that  the  Lieutenant-Governor  was  "a  worse  Rebel  than  Bacon", 
that  he  had  broken  the  laws  of  Virginia,  that  he  had  perjured 
himself,  that  he  "was  not  worth  a  Groat  in  England".  Nor 
was  it  considered  a  sufficient  excuse  that  Ludwell  had  made 
those  remarks  immediately  after  consuming  "part  of  a  Flag- 
gon  of  Syder".^**  The  jury  found  him  guilty  of  "scandaliz- 
ing the  Governor",  but  acquitted  him  of  any  intention  of 
abusing  his  Majesty's  authority.    The  General  Court,  upon  the 

^'•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1376.  "°P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1376. 

"^P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-5S;  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  II,  p.  408. 
^"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  20.  "' Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  12. 

'"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  11. 


220  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

motion  of  Colonel  Jeffreys,  referred  the  case  to  the  King  and 
Privy  Council,  that  they  might  "advise  a  punishment  propor- 
tionable to  the  offence".  ^^^  Against  this  decision  the  defen- 
dant, as  he  had  an  undoubted  right  to  do,  appealed  to  the 
General  Assembly.  Ludwell  felt,  no  doubt,  that  should  the 
appeal  be  allowed,  his  great  influence  in  the  House  of  Bur- 
gesses would  secure  him  a  light  sentence.  But  the  court 
declared  the  case  so  unprecedented  that  the  whole  matter, 
including  the  question  of  appeal,  must  be  decided  by  the  King. 
With  the  return  of  hot  weather.  Colonel  Jeffreys,  not  yet 
being  acclimated,  or  "seasoned",  as  the  Virginians  expressed 

^  it,  again  became  seriously  ill.^^®  The  Council  elected  a  presi- 
dent to  act  in  his  place  and  once  more  assumed  control  of  the 

;  administration.^*'^  The  Green  Spring  faction,  whom  only  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  could  restrain,  again  lifted  its  head  and 
endeavored  "to  continue  their  old  exactions  &  abuses".  ^^^  Feel- 
ing, perhaps,  a  sense  of  security  in  their  remoteness  from  the 
King,  which  made  it  impossible  for  him  to  watch  their  actions 
closely,  or  to  mete  out  to  them  prompt  punishment,  they  still 
disregarded  his  pardon  and  his  reiterated  commands.  ^*^  "The 
colony  would  be  as  peaceful  as  could  be  wished,"  wrote  William 
Sherwood  in  August,  1678,  "except  for  the  malice  of  some  dis- 
contented persons  of  the  late  Governor's  party,  who  endeavour 
by  all  ye  cunning  contrivances  that  by  their  artifice  can  be 
brought  about,  to  bring  a  Contempt  of  Colonel  Jeffreys,  our 
present  good  Governor.  .  .  .  Those  persons  who  are  the 
troublers  of  the  peace  .  .  .  are  .  .  .  Lady  Berkeley,  Colonel 
Philip  Ludwell,  Colonel  Thomas  Ballard,  Colonel  Edward 
Hill,  Major  Robert  Beverley,  all  of  which  are  cherished  by 
Mr.  Secretary  Ludwell  (who  acts  severely.)  It  is  to  be  feared, 
unless  these  fiery  Spiritts  are  allayed  or  removed  home,  there 
will  not  be  that  settled,  happy  peace  and  unity  which  otherwise 
might  be,  for  they  are  entered  into  a  faction,  which  is  upheld 
by  the  expectation  of  my  Lord  Culpei>er's  doing  mighty  things 
for  them  &  their  interest."^^^ 

^"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  XVIII,  p.  23.         "'P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-103. 
'"  Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  307.  ^**  P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-103. 

'*»?.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-107.  '""P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-117. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  221 

Colonel  Jeffreys  died  in  November,  1678.^^^  It  was  the 
fortune  of  this  Governor  to  come  to  the  colony  in  one  of  the 
greatest  crises  of  its  history.  Had  he  been  a  man  of  ability 
and  firmness  he  could  have  rendered  the  people  services  of 
great  value.  He  might  have  put  an  end  to  the  reign  of  terror 
inaugurated  by  Berkeley,  prevented  the  unending  law  suits, 
confiscations  and  compositions,  reorganized  the  county  courts 
and  assured  to  the  people  a  fair  election  of  Burgesses.  He 
seems  to  have  wished  to  rule  justly  and  well,  but  he  was  too 
weak  to  quell  the  strife  between  the  rival  factions  and  bring 
quiet  to  the  distracted  colony. 

So  bitter  was  the  loyal  party  against  Colonel  Jeffreys,  that 
after  his  death  they  sought  to  revenge  themselves  upon  his 
widow.  The  Lieutenant-Governor  had  received  no  part  of 
his  salary  from  March,  1678,  to  the  day  of  his  death,  and  had, 
as  a  result,  incurred  considerable  debt.  As  Mrs.  Jeffreys  was 
unable  to  meet  all  her  husband's  obligations,  she  was  detained 
in  Virginia,  and,  according  to  one  account,  thrown  into 
prison, ^^2  "T'is  plain,"  she  wrote  Secretary  Coventry,  "they 
seek  my  Life  in  malice  to  my  husband,  though  none  of  them  can 
tax  him  with  any  injustice.  ...  I  cannot  hope  to  outlive  this 
persecution,  but  I  most  humbly  beseech  you  to  intercede  for 
me  to  his  Majesty,  that  my  child  may  not  be  ruined."^^^  Mrs. 
Jeffreys  later  received  the  arrears  due  her  husband,  and  was 
thus  enabled  to  free  herself  from  the  power  of  her  enemies. ^^* 

Upon  the  death  of  Colonel  Jeffreys,  Sir  Henry  Chicheley, 
by  virtue  of  a  commission  granted  in  1674,  assumed  control 
of  the  government.  ^^^  The  new  Governor  had  long  served 
with  distinction  in  the  Council,  and  seems  to  have  been  a  "most 
loyal,  worthy  person  and  deservedly  beloved  by  the  whole 
country". ^^^  But  he  was  now  too  "old,  sickly  and  crazy"  to 
govern  the  colony  with  the  vigor  and  firmness  that  were  so 
greatly  needed. ^^'^  During  the  eighteen  months  of  his  admin- 
istration the  people  were  "not  reconciled  to  one  another",  and 
"ill  blood"  only  too  often  was  manifested  by  both  factions. ^^^ 

"^Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  307.  ^"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-135S-304,  305,  309- 

^»  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1355-305.  ^"  P.   R.   O.,   C05-I3S5-370. 

^"Va.  Mag.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  307.  '*•?.  R.  O.,  C0i-4i-i2i. 

'"Sains.,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  230.  '="  Sains.,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  230. 


222  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

'       Sir  Henry  had  himself  been  a  severe  sufferer  by  the  Rebel- 
lion.    He  had   fallen  into  Bacon's  hands  and  had  even,   it 
would  seem,  been  threatened  with  death,   in  retaliation   for 
Berkeley's  execution  of  Captain  Carver.     Yet  he  attempted 
^1  to  rule  impartially  and  well.    Writs  were  issued  in  the  spring  of 
I  1679  for  an  election  of  Burgesses,  and  the  people  were  pro- 
\  tected  from  intimidation  at  the  polls.     The  Assembly,  as  a 
I  result,  showed  itself  more  sane,  more  sensitive  to  the  wishes 
of  the  commons,   than  had  been   either  of  the   sessions   of 
1677.^*'^^     Several  laws  were  enacted  redressing  some  of  the 
most  flagrant  evils  of  the  old  governmental  system  of  Ber- 
keley.    The  voters  of  each  parish  were  empowered  to  elect 
two  men  "to  sitt  in  the  severall  county  courts  and  have  their 
equall  votes  with  the  severall  justices  for  the  makeing  of  by 
lawes".^^**    An  act  was  passed  putting  a  limit  upon  the  exces- 
sive fees  charged  by  the  collectors  of  the  customs. ^^^    And  the 
clamor  of  the  loyalists  for  the  payment  of  their  claims  upon 
the  treasury  were  unheeded,  and  all  public  debts  were  referred 
for  settlement  to  the  next  session.  ^^^ 

Chicheley's  administration  came  temporarily  to  an  end  with 
the  arrival  of  Lord  Culpeper.  The  period  from  the  close  of 
the  Rebellion  to  May,  1680,  when  the  new  Governor-General 
took  the  oath  of  office,  seems,  at  first  sight,  characterized  only 
by  confusion  and  disaster.  The  violent  animosities,  the  un- 
certainty of  property  rights,  the  lack  of  a  firm  and  settled 
government  kept  the  people  in  constant  uneasiness  and  dis- 
content. The  numerous  banishments  and  executions  had 
deprived  the  colony  of  some  of  its  most  intelligent  and  useful 
citizens,  while  the  plundering  of  both  parties  during  the  Re- 
bellion, and  the  numberless  forfeitures  that  followed'  the 
establishment  of  peace,  had  reduced  many  men  to  poverty. 
Nor  had  the  most  pressing  of  the  grievances  that  had  caused 
the  people  to  rise  against  the  government  been  redressed. 
The  Navigation  Acts  were  still  in  force,  the  commons  were 
yet  excluded  from  their  rightful  share  in  the  government,  the 
\    taxes  were  more  oppressive  than  ever. 

"•Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  433-  '"Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  441. 

'"  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  443-  '"  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  456. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  CONFUSION  223 

Yet  amid  the  melancholy  confusion  of  the  times,  important  j 
changes  for  the  better  were  taking  place.  Never  again  was  an  l 
English  Governor  to  exercise  the  despotic  power  that  had  j 
been  Sir  William  Berkeley's.  This  was  not  due  to  the  greater 
leniency  of  the  British  government,  or  to  lack  of  ambition  in 
the  later  Governors.  But  the  Rebellion  and  the  events  follow- 
ing it,  had  weakened  the  loyalty  of  the  people  and  shown  them 
the  jx)ssibility  of  resisting  the  King's  commands.  The  commons, 
angered  at  the  severity  of  the  punishment  inflicted  upon  the 
rebel  leaders,  and  disappointed  in  the  royal  promise  that  their 
grievances  should  be  redressed,  regarded  the  government  with 
sullen  hostility.  The  wealthy  planters  resented  what  they  con- 
sidered Charles'  ingratiUide  for  their  loyal  support  in  the  hour 
of  need,  and  complained  bitterly  of  his  interference  with  their 
attempts  to  restore  their  ruined  fortunes.  Throughout  Ber- 
keley's administration  their  interests  had  seemed  to  be 
identical  with  those  of  the  Governor,  and  they  had  ever  worked 
in  harmony  with  him.  With  the  advent  of  Colonel  Jeffreys, 
however,  they  had  been  thrown  into  violent  opposition  to  the 
executive.  Their  success  in  thwarting  the  policies  of  the 
Lieutenant-Governor,  and  in  evading  and  disobeying  the 
King's  commands  gave  them  a  keen  appreciation  of  their  own 
influence  and  power.  They  were  to  become  more  and  more 
impatient  of  the  control  of  the  Governors,  more  and  more 
prone  to  defy  the  commands  of  the  English  government. 

The  awakened  spirit  of  resistance  bore  rich  fruit  for  the 
cause  of  liberty.  The  chief  difficulty  heretofore  experienced 
by  the  commons  in  defending  their  rights  was  the  lack  of 
intelligent  and  forceful  leaders.  These  they  now  secured  through 
the  frequent  quarrels  of  the  wealthy  planters  with  the  Gov- 
ernors. More  than  once  Councillors,  suspended  from  their  seats 
for  disobedience,  came  forward  as  leaders  in  the  struggle  to 
preserve  the  rights  of  the  people.  In  this  capacity  they  ren- 
dered services  of  the  highest  importance.  Strangely  enough 
some  of  the  leading  spirits  of  the  old  Berkeley  party  became, 
by  their  continued  opposition  to  the  executive,  champions  of 
representative  government  in  the  colony.  Had  it  not  been  for 
the  active  leadership  of  Robert  Beverley  and  Philip  Ludwell 


224  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

the  cause  of  liberty  might  well  have  perished  under  the  assaults 
of  Charles  II  and  James  II. 

The  House  of  Burgesses  was  gradually  becoming  more  rep- 
resentative of  the  people.  The  intimidation  of  voters  practiced 
by  the  loyal  party  immediately  after  the  Rebellion  could  not  be 
continued  indefinitely.  As  the  terror  inspired  by  Berkeley's 
revenge  upon  the  rebels  began  to  wane,  the  commons  insisted 
more  upon  following  their  own  inclinations  at  the  polls. 
Moreover,  the  incessant  quarrels  of  the  Governors  with  the 
members  of  the  aristocracy  made  it  impossible  for  any  clique 
to  control  again  the  electoral  machinery.  As  the  sheriffs  and 
justices  were  no  longer  so  closely  allied  with  the  executive  as 
they  had  been  in  the  Restoration  period,  false  returns  of  Bur- 
gesses and  other  electoral  frauds  were  apt  to  be  of  less  frequent 
occurrence. 

Thus,  during  the  years  immediately  following  the  Rebellion, 
forces  were  shaping  themselves  which  were  to  make  it  possible 
for  the  colony  to  resist  those  encroachments  of  the  Crown 
upon  its  liberties  that  marked  the  last  decade  of  the  rule  of  the 
Stuart  kings,  and  to  pass  safely  through  what  may  well  be 
called  the  Critical  Period  of  Virginia  history. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
The  Critical  Period 

For  some  years  after  the  Restoration  the  administration  of 
English  colonial  affairs  had  been  very  lax.  The  Council  of 
Plantations,  which  had  served  as  a  Colonial  Office  during  the 
period  from  1660  to  1672,  had  done  little  to  control  the  Gov- 
ernors or  to  supervise  and  direct  their  policies.  With  the  excep- 
tion of  one  list  of  questions  sent  to  Virginia  in  1670,  they  had 
left  Sir  William  Berkeley  almost  entirely  to  his  own  devices. 
September  27,  1672,  the  Council  of  Plantations  was  united 
with  the  Board  of  Domestic  Trade  to  form  the  Council  of 
Trade  and  Plantations.  This  new  arrangement  seems  not  to 
have  been  productive  of  good  results,  for  in  December,  1674, 
after  the  fall  of  the  Cabal  ministry,  it  was  discontinued  and  the 
direction  of  colonial  affairs  entrusted  to  the  King's  Privy 
Council.  This  important  body,  finding  its  new  duties  very 
onerous,  created  a  committee  of  twenty-one  members,  to  whom 
the  supervision  of  trade  and  plantations  was  assigned.  In 
this  way  the  King's  most  trusted  ministers  were  brought  into 
close  touch  with  colonial  affairs.  We  find  now  such  prominent 
statesmen  as  Secretary  Coventry,  Secretary  Williamson  and 
Sir  Lionel  Jenkins  carrying  on  extensive  correspondence  with 
the  Governors,  becoming  interested  in  all  their  problems  and 
needs,  and  demanding  copies  of  all  journals  of  Assembly  and 
other  state  papers.^ 

This  closer  intimacy  with  the  colonial  governments  led 
inevitably  to  a  feeling  of  intolerance  for  local  autonomy  and 
for  representative  institutions,  and  to  a  determination  to  force 
upon  the  colonists  a  conformity  with  the  policies  and  desires 
of  the  English  government.  Charles  II  and  James  II, 
instituted,  in  the  decade  preceding  the  English  Revolution,  a 
series  of  measures  designed  to  curb  the  independence  of  the 

*Osg.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  280,  281. 

225 


226  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

colonists.  Some  of  the  Assembly's  long-established  and  most 
important  rights  were  attacked.  Many  of  its  statutes  were 
annulled  by  proclamation;  its  judicial  powers  were  forever 
abolished;  its  control  over  taxation  and  expenditure  was 
threatened;  the  privilege  of  selecting  the  Assembly  clerk  was 
taken  from  it;  while  even  the  right  to  initiate  legislation  was 
assailed. 

The  intolerant  mood  of  the  King  and  Privy  Council  is 
reflected  in  the  instructions  given  Lord  Culpeper  upon  his 
departure  for  Virginia.  They  included  orders  depriving  him 
of  the  power,  exercised  freely  by  all  former  Governors,  of  call- 
ing sessions  of  the  Assembly.  "It  is  Our  Will  and  pleasure," 
Charles  declared,  "that  for  the  future  noe  General  Assembly  be 
called  without  Our  special  directions,  but  that,  upon  occasion, 
you  doe  acquaint  us  by  letter,  with  the  necessity  of  calling  such 
an  Assembly,  and  pray  Our  consent,  and  directions  for  their 
meeting.  "2 

Even  more  dangerous  to  the  liberties  of  the  people  was  the 
attempt  to  deprive  the  Assembly  of  the  right  to  initiate  legisla- 
tion. "You  shall  transmit  unto  us,"  Culpeper  was  commanded, 
"with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Council,  a  draught  of  such 
Acts,  as  you  shall  think  fit  and  necessary  to  bee  passed,  that 
wee  may  take  the  same  into  Our  consideration,  and  return  them 
in  the  forme  wee  shall  think  fit  they  bee  enacted  in.  And, 
upon  receipt  of  Our  commands,  you  shall  then  summon  an 
Assembly,  and  propose  the  said  Laws  for  their  consent."^ 

Most  fortunately  neither  of  these  instructions  could  be  en- 
forced. The  great  distance  of  England  from  Virginia,  and  the 
time  required  to  communicate  with  the  King,  made  the  sum- 
moning of  the  Assembly  and  the  initiation  of  legislation  with- 
out the  royal  assent  a  matter  of  absolute  necessity.  Lord 
Culpeper,  with  his  Majesty's  especial  permission,  disregarded 
these  orders  during  his  first  visit  to  the  colony,  and  later,  to  his 
great  satisfaction,  the  Committee  of  Trade  and  Plantations 
"altered  their  measures  therein".'* 

Culpeper  was  directed  to  secure  in  the  colony  a  permanent 

'P.  R.  O.,  C05-I3S5-334;  McD.,  Vol.  V,  p.  302. 

•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-13SS-313,  334. 

*P.  R.  O.,  C05-I3S5-334;  McD.,  Vol.  V,  p.  302. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  227 

revenue  for  the  King.  It  was  rightly  judged  that  the  repre- 
sentatives of  royal  authority  could  never  be  entirely  masters 
of  the  government  while  they  were  dependent  for  their  salaries 
upon  the  votes  of  the  Assembly.  Sir  William  Berkeley,  it  is 
true,  had  rendered  his  position  secure  by  obliging  all  "the  men 
of  parts  and  estates",  but  similar  methods  might  be  impossible 
for  other  Governors.  The  King  and  Privy  Council  did  not, 
however,  attempt  to  raise  the  desired  revenue  by  imposing  a 
tax  upon  the  people  without  their  own  consent.  An  act  levying 
a  duty  of  two  shillings  a  hogshead  upon  all  tobacco  exported 
from  Virginia  was  drawn  up  by  the  Attorney-General  for 
ratification  by  the  Assembly.^  The  consent  of  the  King  in 
Council  was  duly  received  and  the  bill,  with  an  act  concerning 
naturalization  and  another  for  a  general  pardon,  were  sent  to 
Virginia  by  Lord  Culpeper.  "These  bills,"  the  King  told  him, 
"we  have  caused  to  be  under  the  Create  Seale  of  England,  and 
our  will  is  that  the  same  .  .  .  you  shall  cause  to  be  considered 
and  treated  upon  in  our  Assembly  of  Virginia."^ 

The  revenue  bill  was  quite  similar  to  an  act  of  Assembly 
still  in  force,  which  had  imposed  a  duty  upon  exported  tobacco, 
but  an  all-important  difference  lay  in  the  disposal  of  the  funds 
thus  raised.  The  former  statute  had  given  the  proceeds  of 
this  tax  to  the  Assembly,  "for  the  defraying  the  publique 
necessary  charges","^  but  the  new  act  was  to  grant  the  money 
"to  the  King's  most  excellent  Majesty  his  heires  and  Suc- 
cessors for  ever  to  and  for  the  better  support  of  the 
Government".^ 

In  order  to  carry  out  these  new  designs  for  the  government 
of  the  colony,  the  King  ordered  Lord  Culpeper  to  prepare  to 
sail  at  once.  The  Governor,  however,  was  most  reluctant  to 
leave  the  pleasures  of  the  court  for  a  life  in  the  American 
wilderness.  His  departure  had  already  been  long  delayed, 
more  than  two  years  having  elapsed  since  Charles  had  told 
the  colonists  to  expect  his  speedy  arrival.  Yet  he  still  de- 
layed and  procrastinated.     On  the  third  of  December,  1679, 

'  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356;  CO391.2-276,  325,  283  to  285. 
•P.  R.  O.,  CO1-43-165.  'Hen.,  II,  p.  133. 

•P.  R.  O.,  COs-1376;  Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  466. 


VIRGINIA  ¥NDER  THE  STWARTS 

an  order  was  issued  giving  his  Lordship  "liberty  to  stay  in 
Towne  about  his  affaires  until  Monday  next,  and  noe  longer,- 
and  then  to  proceed  forthwith"  to  the  Downs,  where  "the 
Oxford  frigat"  was  waiting  to  convey  him  to  Virginia.®  But 
as  he  still  lingered  in  London,  the  Captain  of  the  frigate  was 
ordered  to  sail  up  the  Thames  to  take  him  on  board. ^°  No 
sooner  had  he  left  his  moorings,  however,  than  Culpeper, 
probably  in  order  to  gain  time,  hastened  away  to  the  Downs. 
This  so  aroused  the  King's  anger  that  he  was  pleased  to  direct 
one  of  his  principal  secretaries  to  signify  by  letter  to  Lord 
Culpeper  his  high  displeasure  at  his  delay  and  neglect  of  duty, 
and  that  his  intentions  were  to  appoint  another  Governor  of 
Virginia  unless  he  embarked  as  soon  as  the  frigate  returned 
to  the  Downs.^^  But  now  adverse  winds  set  in,  and  Culpeper, 
with  the  tobacco  fleet  which  had  waited  for  him,  was  unable 
to  sail  until  February  13,  1680.^^ 

I     He  arrived  off  the  capes  May  the  second,  and  eight  days 
(later  took  formal  possession  of  his  government.    Immediately 
,  the  Councillors  and  other  leading  planters  flocked  around  him, 
i  eager  to  secure  his  support  against  the  old  rebellious  party. 
Nor  was  their  presentation  of  their  cause  ineffectual  in  winning 
the  Governor's  sympathy.     "All  things,"  he  wrote  Secretary 
Coventry,  "are  .  .  .   far  otherwise  than  I  supposed  in  Eng- 
land, and  I  beleeve  ye  Council,  at  least  I  have  seen  through  a 
I    mist."^^  It  was  to  be  expected  then,  that  in  settling  the  dispute 
1     that  had  so  long  troubled  the  colony  he  would  favor  the  Ber- 
\    keley  faction.    And  this,  so  far  as  the  King's  commands  would 
permit,  he  seems  to  have  done.     The  wealthy  planters  ex- 
pressed their  satisfaction  with  his  measures,  and  the  commons, 
if  they  disapproved,  feared  to  reveal  their  resentment.     "His 
Excellency,"    wrote   Colonel    Spencer,    "has   with    soe   great 
prudence  settled  all  the  Affairs  of  the  Country  that  our  late 
different  Interests  are  perfectly  united  to  the  general  satisfac- 
tion of  all  his  Majesty's  Subjects  in  this  colony. "^^ 

The  Berkeley  party  was  deeply  displeased  at  the  King's 

•  P.  R.  O.,  COS-I35S-372.  '"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-i355-375. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1355-375,  376.  "  P.  R.  O,  CO5-135S-378. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  005-1355-385.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-13S5-384. 


Ms 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  229 

command  to  exclude  Colonel  Philip  Ludwell  from  the  Council. 
Recognizing  in  the  order  the  influence  of  Colonel  Jeffreys 
and  the  other  commissioners,  they  assured  the  Governor  that  it 
had  been  secured  by  false  representations.  The  Councillors 
declared  "that  they  were  very  sencible  of  ye  want  of  that 
Assistance  they  for  many  Years"  had  had  from  Colonel  Lud- 
well, "whose  good  abilities,  Knowne  Integrity  and  approved 
Loyalty"  rendered  him  most  necessary  to  his  Majesty's  ser- 
vice. They  therefore  earnestly  requested  "his  Excellency 
to  Readmitt  &  Receive  him  to  be  one  of  ye  Councill".^^  Cul- 
peper  yielded  readily,  and  Ludwell  was  restored  to  his  seat. 

The  Burgesses  were  chagrined  at  the  order  to  oust  Major 
Robert  Beverley  from  all  public  employment.  He  was  again 
the  clerk  of  Assembly,  for  which  office  he  was  "their  Unani- 
mous Choyce",  and  his  disgrace  was  regarded  as  a  rebuke  to 
the  House. ^^^  Upon  their  earnest  petition  Culpeper  consented 
that  he  should  retain  that  important  post  in  which  he  was  soon 
to  render  signal  service  to  the  people  and  to  incur  again  the 
anger  of  the  King  and  his  ministers.^"^ 

When  the  Assembly  convened  the  Governor  at  once  laid 
before  it  the  Act  of  General  Pardon,  the  Act  of  Naturaliza- 
tion and  the  Act  for  a  Public  Revenue.  To  the  first  and  the 
second  he  obtained  a  prompt  assent,  but  the  third  was  strenu- 
ously resisted.  The  House  of  Burgesses  was  filled  with  gentle- 
men of  the  best  families,  men  closely  allied  with  the  Council 
in  position  and  interest,  yet  they  were  unwilling  to  permit  any 
part  of  the  public  revenue  to  pass  out  of  the  control  of  the 
people.^*  "The  House,"  they  declared,  "doe  most  humbly 
desire  to  be  Excused  if  they  doe  not  give  their  approbacon  of 
his  Majesties  bill."^^  And  so  determined  were  they,  that  when 
the  matter  was  again  brought  before  them  by  the  Governor 
they  refused  even  to  resume  the  debate.^® 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1376-265.  "Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1680,  p.  i. 

"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1680,  p.  7. 

"Among  the   Burgesses   were   Captain   William   Byrd,   Major   Swann, 
Benjamin  Harrison,  Colonel  Ballard,  Colonel  Mason,  Colonel  John  Page, 
Colonel  Matthew  Kemp,  William  Fitzhugh,  Isaac  Allerton,  John   Carter 
and  Captain  Fox.     P.  R.  O.,  COs-1376-321. 
"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1680,  pp.  13,  14.         "Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1660,  p.  27. 


230  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

But  Culpeper,  fearful  of  the  King's  displeasure,  and  uneasy 
for  the  payment  of  his  own  salary,  made  strenuous  efforts  to 
secure  the  passage  of  the  bill.  He  did  not  scruple  to  resort 
to  bribery  and  intimidation  to  force  obedience  from  the  stub- 
born Burgesses.  We  have  the  testimony  of  the  Governor 
himself  to  one  notorious  case  of  the  misuse  of  the  patronage. 
Among  the  leaders  of  the  House  of  Burgesses  was  Isaac 
Allerton,  a  man  of  wealth  and  education,  and  an  excellent 
speaker.21  "fjg  ^[^  assure  me,"  Culpeper  reported  to  the  Privy 
Council,  "of  his  utmost  services  in  whatsoever  the  King  should 
command  him  by  his  Governor,  particularly  as  to  a  further 
Bill  of  Revenue  for  the  support  of  ye  Government,  And  I  did 
engage  to  move  his  Majesty  that  hee  should  bee  of  the  Coun- 
cil ..  .  though  not  to  be  declared  till  after  the  Session  of 
next  Assembly,  when  I  am  sure  he  can  bee  as  serviceable  if 
not  more  than  any  other  person  whatsoever.  "^^  This  bargain 
was  faithfully  kept  and  in  time  Allerton,  for  thus  betraying 
his  trust,  received  his  seat  in  the  Council.^^ 

Nor  did  Lord  Culpeper  hesitate  to  intimidate  the  Burgesses 
by  threatening  to  demand  the  payment  of  all  arrears  of  quit- 
rents.  This  tax,  although  belonging  to  the  King  from  the  first 
settlement  of  the  colony,  had  not,  for  many  years,  been  duly 
collected.  It  was  now  rumored,  however,  that  the  Privy  Coun- 
cil intended,  not  only  to  enforce  for  the  future  a  strict  pay- 
ment, but  to  demand  a  settlement  for  the  accumulated  arrears. 
In  1679  Sir  Henry  Chicheley  had  forwarded  to  his  Majesty 
a  petition  from  the  Assembly  asking  relief  from  this  great 
burden.  If  this  be  not  granted,  he  wrote,  the  payments  which 
have  been  so  long  due  and  amount  to  so  vast  a  sum,  will  fall 
heavily  upon  all,  but  especially  upon  the  poor.^*  Culpeper, 
knowing  well  the  anxiety  of  the  Burgesses  upon  this  point,  told 
them  that  if  they  expected  the  King  to  grant  their  petition,  they 
must  yield  to  his  desire  for  a  royal  revenue  in  the  colony. 

Calling  the  Assembly  before  him,  he  urged  them  to  resume 
their  debate.  "It  looks,"  he  said,  "as  if  you  could  give  noe 
reasons  or  as  if  you  were  affraid  to  be  convinced.  ...  I  desire 

**?.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-125.  "P.  R.  O.,  COS-I3S6-I2S,  126. 

*»  P.  R.  O.,  COS-1356-26S.  •*  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1355-361. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  231 

you  to  lay  aside  that  irregular  proceeding  .  .  .  and  resume  the 
debate."  The  Council,  he  added,  had  given  their  unanimous 
consent  to  the  bill.  "Consider  the  affaires  of  the  Quitt  Rents, 
Consider  the  King's  favour  in  every  thing  you  may  aske  even 
to  a  cessacon  ,  .  .  and  reflect  if  it  be  tante  for  you  not  to 
concurr  in  a  thing  that,  I  am  assured,  ye  King  ,  .  .  judges 
his  owne  and  will  soe  use  it  and  the  more  fully  then  if  this 
Act  pass."^^ 

Thus  threatened,  the  Burgesses  finally  yielded,  and  the  bill 
became  law.  But  they  insisted  upon  adding  to  it  two  provisos : 
that  the  former  export  duty  upon  tobacco  be  repealed,  and  that 
the  exemption  of  Virginia  ship  owners  from  the  payment  of 
the  tax,  which  had  been  a  provision  of  the  former  law,  should 
be  continued.^^  When  some  months  later  the  matter  came 
before  the  Committee  of  Trade  and  Plantations,  their  Lord- 
ships expressed  much  dissatisfaction  at  these  amendments, 
declaring  that  the  bill  should  have  passed  "in  Terminis".  Since, 
however,  the  first  proviso  in  no  way  changed  the  sense  of  the 
act,  and  had  been  added  only  to  prevent  a  double  imposition, 
they  recommended  that  it  should  be  continued.  But  the  second 
was  declared  null  and  void  by  order  of  the  King,  as  "irregular 
and  unfit  to  be  allowed  of".^'^ 

Lord  Culpeper,  immediately  after  the  dismissal  of  the  As- 
sembly made  ready  to  return  to  England.  August  3,  1680,  he 
read  to  the  Council  an  order  from  the  King  granting  him  per- 
mission to  leave  the  colony,  and  a  few  days  later  he  set  sail  in 
The  James.^^  The  government  was  again  left  in  the  hands  of 
the  infirm  Chicheley.^® 

Culpeper,  upon  his  arrival  in  England,  told  the  King  that  all 
was  well  in  the  colony,  that  the  old  contentions  had  been  for- 
gotten, and  the  people  were  happy  and  prosperous.  But  this 
favorable  report,  which  was  made  by  the  Governor  to  palliate 
his  desertion  of  his  post,  was  far  from  being  true.  There  was, 
as  he  well  knew,  a  deep-seated  cause  of  discontent  in  Virginia, 
that  threatened  constantly  to  drive  the  people  again  into  mutiny 

*" Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1680,  p.  32.  '•Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1680,  p.  36.  / 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-135S-388  to  394. 

^P.  R.  O.,  CO5-135S-380;  COs-1376-286. 

"P.  R.  O..  CO5-13S5-396. 


i< 


232  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

'and  disorder.  This  was  the  continued  low  price  of  tobacco.  In 
the  years  which  had  elapsed  since  Bacon's  Rebellion,  the  people, 
despite  their  bitter  quarrels,  had  produced  several  large  crops, 
and  the  English  market  was  again  glutted.  "What  doth  quite 
overwhelm  both  us  and  Maryland,"  complained  the  colonists, 
"is  the  extreme  low  price  of  our  only  commodity  .  .  .  and 
consequently  our  vast  poverty  and  infinite  necessity. "^*^  The 
Burgesses,  in  1682,  spoke  of  the  worthlessness  of  tobacco  as 
an  "ineffable  Calamity".  "Wee  are,"  they  said,  "noe  wayes 
able  to  force  a  miserable  subsistance  from  the  same.  ...  If 
force  of  penne,  witt,  or  words  Could  truely  represent  (our 
condition)  as  it  is,  the  sad  resentments  would  force  blood 
from  any  Christian  Loyall  Subjects  heart."^^  Some  months 
later  the  Council  wrote,  "The  people  of  Virginia  are  generally, 
some  few  excepted,  extremely  poor,  .  .  .  not  being  able  to 
provide  against  the  pressing  necessities  of  their  families."^^ 
That  the  Privy  Council  was  aware,  as  early  as  October,  1681, 
that  these  conditions  might  lead  to  another  insurrection,  is 
attested  by  a  letter  of  the  Committee  of  Trade  and  Plantations 
to  Lord  Culpeper.  "We  are  informed,"  they  wrote,  "that 
Virginia  is  in  great  danger  of  disturbance  ...  by  reason  of 
the  extreme  poverty  of  the  People,  occasioned  by  the  low 
price  of  tobacco  which,  tis  feared  may  induce  the  servants  to 
plunder  the  Stores  of  the  Planters  and  the  Ships  arriving  there 
and  to  commit  other  outrages  and  disorders  as  in  the  late 
Rebellion."3s 

This  universal  distress  created  a  strong  sentiment  through- 
out the  colony  in  favor  of  governmental  restriction  upon  the 
planting  of  tobacco.  Unless  something  were  done  to  limit  the 
annual  crop,  prices  would  continue  to  decline.  Many  mer- 
chants, who  had  bought  up  large  quantities  of  tobacco  in  Eng- 
land with  the  expectation  that  its  value  would  eventually  rise, 
"fell  to  insinuate  with  the  easiest  sort  People  how  advan- 
tageous it  would  bee  .  .  .  if  an  Act  of  Assembly  could  be 
procured  to  cease  planting  tobacco   for  one  whole  year".^* 

**  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1355-408.  "'  Jour.  H.  of  B.,  April  1682,  p.  4. 

""P.  R.  O.,  C05-I3S6-I79.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-1,  2. 

"P.  R.  O.,   CO5-13S6-177. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  233 

When,  in  the  spring  of  1682,  it  became  apparent  that  another 
large  crop  must  be  expected,  an  almost  universal  demand  arose 
for  the  immediate  convening  of  the  Assembly  for  the  passage 
of  a  law  of  cessation. 

The  Councillors,  although  themselves  in  favor  of  some 
restraint  upon  the  huge  output,  advised  the  aged  Deputy-Gover- 
nor not  to  consent  to  a  session  at  this  juncture. ^^  But  Chiche- 
ley,  persuaded,  it  was  claimed,  by  the  insistent  arguments  of 
Major  Beverley,  yielded  to  the  desires  of  the  people,  and  upon 
his  own  responsibility,  issued  writs  summoning  the  Burgesses 
to  convene  at  Jamestown,  April  18,  1682.^®  Five  days  before 
the  date  of  meeting,  however,  a  letter  arrived  from  the  King, 
expressly  forbidding  an  Assembly  until  November  the  tenth, 
when,  it  was  hoped,  Lord  Culpeper  would  have  returned  to  his 
govemment.^'^  The  letter  also  informed  the  Deputy-Governor 
that  two  companies  of  troops  that  had  remained  in  Vir- 
ginia ever  since  the  Rebellion,  could  no  longer  be  maintained 
at  the  expense  of  the  royal  Exchequer.  Since  many  of  the 
Burgesses  were  already  on  their  way  to  Jamestown,  Sir  Henry 
decided  to  hold  a  brief  session,  in  order  to  permit  them,  if  they 
so  desired,  to  continue  the  companies  at  the  charge  of  the 
colony.^*  But  he  expressed  his  determination,  in  obedience 
to  the  King's  commands,  to  forbid  the  consideration  of  any 
other  matter  whatsoever. 

The  Burgesses  met  "big  with  expectation  to  enact  a  Cessa- 
tion",^® The  appeals  of  their  constituents  and  the  smart  of 
their  own  purses  made  them  desperately  resolute  to  give  the 
country  relief  from  the  present  depressing  conditions.  When 
they  learned  that  after  all  their  session  was  to  be  in  vain,  and 
that  they  were  to  be  allowed  to  vote  only  on  the  matter  of  con- 
tinuing the  companies,  they  were  deeply  concerned  and  angered. 
Addressing  the  Deputy  Governor,  they  declared  themselves 
overwhelmed  with  grief  at  the  expectation  of  adjournment. 
They  had,  from  all  parts  of  the  drooping  country,  passionately 
wended  their  way  to  Jamestown,  to  attend  this  Assembly,  upon 

-P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-73. 

••P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-73,  156;  Jour,  H.  of  B.,  April  1682. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-ii,  12,  68,  72. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-8.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-68. 


234  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

which  the  "last  expiring  hopes"  of  the  "miserably  indigent 
poor  Country"  were  reposed.  Should  they  be  compelled  to 
return  to  their  homes,  having  accomplished  nothing,  the  people 
would  be  struck  with  amazement,  "like  an  unexpected  death 
wound">« 

The  Deputy  Governor,  not  daring  to  disobey  the  King, 
ignored  their  appeal,  and  bade  them  decide  without  delay 
whether  or  not  they  would  continue  the  two  companies.  But 
the  Burgesses  would  give  no  definite  answer  upon  this  matter, 
hoping  by  a  policy  of  delay  to  win,  in  the  end,  Chicheley's 
consent  to  the  cessation.  After  seven  days  of  fruitless  bicker- 
ing Sir  Henry,  in  anger  at  their  obstinacy,  prorogued  the 
Assembly  to  November  the  tenth. *^  Before  their  dismissal, 
however,  the  Burgesses,  in  order  to  show  that  they  had  not 
been  remiss  in  endeavoring  to  secure  relief  for  the  people, 
voted  that  the  journal  of  their  proceedings  should  be  read 
publicly  in  every  county. 

Nor  had  they  misjudged  the  desperate  humor  of  the  people. 
When  it  became  known  throughout  the  colony  that  the  As- 
sembly had  done  nothing  to  restrict  the  planting  of  tobacco, 
the  anger  of  the  poor  planters  could  not  be  restrained.  Some 
bold  spirits  proposed  that  the  people  should  assemble  in  various 
parts  of  the  country,  and,  in  defiance  of  law  and  order,  cut  to 
pieces  the  tobacco  then  in  the  fields.  If  the  King  would  not 
permit  a  cessation  by  law,  they  would  bring  about  a  cessation 
by  force.  A  few  days  after  the  close  of  the  Assembly,  parties 
of  men  in  Gloucester  began  the  work  of  destruction.  It  re- 
quired but  little  exertion  to  ruin  the  tender  plants,  and  the 
rioters,  passing  from  plantation  to  plantation,  in  an  incredibly 
short  time  accomplished  enormous  havoc.  Many  men,  filled 
with  the  contagion,  cut  up  their  own  tobacco,  and  then  joined 
the  mob  in  the  destruction  of  the  crops  of  their  neighbors.^^ 

As  soon  as  the  news  of  this  strange  insurrection  reached 
Jamestown,  Chicheley  dispatched  Colonel  Kemp  to  Gloucester 
with  directions  to  muster  the  militia  and  to  restore  order  by 

"  Jour.  H.  of  B.,  April  1682,  pp.  4.  5. 

"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  April  1682;  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-68. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-6S,  66,  6t. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  335 

force  of  arms.  This  officer,  with  a  troop  of  horse,  fell  upon 
one  party  of  plant-cutters,  and  captured  twenty-two  of  their 
number.  "Two  of  the  principal  and  incorrigible  rogues"  he 
held  for  trial,  but  "the  rest  submitting  and  giving  assurances 
of  their  quiet  and  peacable  behavior  were  remitted".^^  Other 
parties,  intimidated  by  these  vigorous  measures,  dispersed,  and 
soon  peace  was  restored  throughout  all  Gloucester.  But  now 
news  reached  the  Deputy-Governor  "that  the  next  adjacent 
county,  being  new  Kent,  was  lately  broke  forth,  committing  the 
like  spoyles  on  plants".  And  no  sooner  had  the  troops  sup- 
pressed the  rioters  here  than  the  disorders  spread  to  Middlesex 
and  other  counties.  It  became  necessary  to  issue  orders  to 
the  commanders  of  the  militia  in  each  county  to  keep  parties  of 
horse  in  continual  motion,  to  prevent  the  designs  of  the  plant- 
cutters  and  arrest  their  leaders."**  And  then  the  rioters,  who 
had  at  first  carried  on  their  work  in  the  open  day,  "went  in 
great  companys  by  night,  destroying  and  pulling  up  whole 
fields  of  tobacco  after  it  was  well  grown".*^  Not  until  August 
were  the  disorders  finally  suppressed. 

These  troubles,  coming  so  soon  after  Bacon's  Rebellion, 
caused  great  apprehension,  both  to  the  colonial  government  and 
to  the  Privy  Council.  "I  know,"  wrote  Secretary  Spencer,  "the 
necessities  of  the  inhabitants  to  be  such  .  .  .  their  low  estate 
makes  them  desperate.  ...  If  they  goe  forward  the  only 
destroying  Tobacco  plants  will  not  satiate  their  rebellious 
appatites  who,  if  they  increase  and  find  the  strength  of  their 
own  arms,  will  not  bound  themselves."*^  And,  although  the 
actual  rioters  were  "inconsiderable  people",  yet  it  was  thought 
they  had  been  instigated  by  men  of  position  and  wealth.*'^ 

Grave  suspicion  rested  upon  Major  Robert  Beverley.*^  It 
had  been  the  importunities  of  "the  over-active  Clerk"  that  had 
persuaded  Chicheley,  against  the  advice  of  the  Council,  to 
convene  the  Assembly.  It  was  he  that  had  been  the  most 
industrious  advocate  of  a  cessation,  that  had  fomented  the 
disputes  in  the  Assembly,  that  had  most  strenuously  opposed 

«  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-70.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-71. 

«  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-178.  **  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-71. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-178.  **  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-74. 


236  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

adjournment.  And  it  was  he,  the  Council  believed,  that  had 
"instilled  into  the  multitude  .  .  .  the  right  of  making  a  Ces- 
sation by  cutting  up  Plants".*^  Moreover,  they  thought  it  not 
improbable  that  he  would  lead  the  people  into  a  new  insurrec- 
tion. The  rabble  regarded  him  with  veneration  and  love.  His 
activity  in  suppressing  the  Rebellion  and  his  opposition  to  the 
county  grievances  of  1677  had  been  forgotten,  and  they  saw 
in  him  now  only  the  defender  of  the  poor  and  helpless.  Were 
he  to  assume  the  role  of  a  Bacon  and  place  himself  at  the  head 
of  the  commons,  he  might  easily  make  himself  master  of  the 
colony.  Although  there  was  no  evidence  against  him,  "but  only 
rudeness  and  sauciness",  it  was  thought  advisable  to  render 
him  powerless  to  accomplish  harm,  by  placing  him  under 
arrest.^*^  He  was  taken  without  resistance  by  Major-General 
Smith,  "though  to  his  own  great  loss  of  2  or  300  pounds,  by 
the  Rabbles  cutting  up  his  Tobacco  plants  within  two  days  after 
out  of  Spight".^^ 

Beverley  was  kept  in  strict  confinement  on  board  an  English 
ship,  the  Duke  of  York,  where  for  the  time,  he  was  safe  from 
rescue  by  the  people.  But  so  fearful  was  the  Council  that  he 
might  plot  for  a  general  insurrection,  that  they  issued  orders 
forbidding  him  to  send  or  to  receive  letters,  and  permitting  him 
to  speak  only  in  the  presence  of  the  captain  of  the  ship.^^ 
Even  these  harsh  measures  did  not  reassure  them,  and  it  was 
decided  to  send  him  to  the  Eastern  Shore,  where  the  people 
were  most  loyal  to  the  government,  and  where  rescue  would 
be  impossible.^ ^  As  preparations  were  being  made  to  effect 
his  transfer,  he  escaped  from  the  custody  of  the  sheriff,  and 
returned  to  his  home  in  Middlesex.  But  he  was  soon  re- 
captured, and  conveyed  to  'Northampton.  Here,  despite  all 
the  efforts  of  his  friends  and  his  own  violent  protests,  he  was 
kept  in  confinement  for  months.  In  the  fall  he  applied  for  a 
writ  of  habeas  corpus,  but  this  was  denied  him  under  the  pre- 
text that  the  whole  matter  had  been  referred  to  the  King,  and 
was  no  longer  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Deputy-Governor 

*'P.  R.  O.,  CO5-13S6-74.  ~Hen.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  543- 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-IS6.  "Hen.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  544- 

"Hen.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  S46. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  237 

and  Council.^*  Since,  however,  all  fear  of  a  rebellion  was  now 
passed,  he  was  permitted,  upon  giving  bail  to  the  sum  of  £2,000, 
to  return  to  his  home.  But  he  was  still  restricted  to  the  counties 
of  Middlesex  and  Gloucester,  was  declared  ineligible  to  public 
office  and  was  forbidden  to  plead  as  an  attorney  in  any  colonial 
court.^^ 

When  the  Privy  Council  learned  of  the  plant-cutting  in  Vir- ' 
ginia,  they  ordered  Lord  Culpeper  "to  repair  to  the  Govern- 
ment with  all  possible  speed,  in  order  to  find  out,  by  the  strictest 
enquiry,  the  abbetors  and  instruments  of  this  commotion".. 
And  since  they  too  were  fearful  of  a  new  insurrection,  they  \ 
gave  directions  "that  some  person  who  shall  be  found  most 
faulty  may  be   forthwith  punished".'^®     "After  which,"   the 
Privy  Council  advised,  "and  not  before  the  Governor  may  be 
directed  to  consider  of  and  propose,  with  the  advice  of  the 
Council  and  the  Assembly,  .  .  .  some  temperament  in  rela- 
tion to  the  Planting  of  Tobacco  and  raising  the  price  of  that 
commodity.""'^ 

Culpeper  left  England  in  October,  1682,  upon  "the  Mermaid 
frigat",  and,  after  a  tedious  and  dangerous  voyage  of  eleven 
weeks,  arrived  safely  in  Virginia.     He  was  resolved  that  the  ] 
persons  responsible  for  the  plant-cutting  should  be  brought  1 
immediately  to  trial,  and  punished  with  the  utmost  rigor  of  the  ' 
law.    The  strictest  inquiry  was  made  into  the  conduct  of  Major 
Beverley,  and  had  there  been  evidence  sufficient  to  convict  him, 
the  unfortunate  Clerk  would  undoubtedly  have  suffered  death 
upon  the  gallows.     But  since  only  the  most  trivial  offenses 
could  be  adduced  against  him,  Culpeper  was  forced  to  turn 
elsewhere  for  the  victims  demanded  by  the  English  government. 

So  the  prosecution  was  now  directed  against  some  of  the 
actual  plant-cutters.  In  this,  however,  Culpeper  found  him- 
self greatly  embarrassed  by  Chicheley's  previous  treatment 
of  the  matter.  The  Deputy-Governor  had,  some  months  be- 
fore, issued  pardons  to  many  of  the  chief  offenders,  and  had 
permitted  the  others  to  give  bail,  thus  treating  their  crime  as 
"Ryot  and  noe  more",  and  making  the  affair  seem  "as  slight 

"  Hen.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  546,  547-  "  Hen.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  547. 

-  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-76.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-76,  77. 


V 


238  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

as  possible  to  the  people".^®  But  Culpeper,  despite  this  action 
of  Sir  Henry,  ordered  the  arrest  of  four  of  the  most  notorious' 
plant-cutters  and  charged  them  with  high  treason.  Their  trial 
created  great  excitement  throughout  the  colony,  but  "despite 
the  high  words  and  threats"  of  the  rabble,  three  of  them  were 
convicted.  Two  were  executed — Somerset  Davies  at  James- 
town, and  Black  Austin  "before  the  Court-house  in  Glocester 
county,  where  the  Insurrection  first  broke  out".^®  The  third 
was  pardoned  by  the  Governor,  "Hee  was  extremely  young," 
Culpeper  wrote,  "not  past  19,  meerely  drawn  in  and  very 
penitent,  and  therefore  ...  I  thought  fit  to  mingle  mercy 
with  Justice  and  Repreeved  him  ...  to  the  end  the  whole 
country  might  be  convinced  that  there  was  no  other  motive  in 
the  thing  but  purely  to  maintain  Government."®^ 

But  although  Culpeper  was  thus  vigorous  in  punishing  the 
disorders  of  the  poor  people,  he  did  nothing  to  remove  the  cause 
of  their  turbulence — the  low  price  of  tobacco.  By  an  order  in 
Council  of  June  17,  1682,  he  had  been  directed  to  grant  a 
cessation,  should  it  seem  expedient,  and  had  been  given  a  letter 
from  Secretary  Jenkins  to  Lord  Baltimore,  requiring  the  co- 
operation of  Maryland.^^  But,  upon  finding  the  colony  in 
peace  and  quiet,  and  the  Assembly  busy  with  other  concerns, 
he  "took  advantage  thereof",  and  kept  secret  this  unexpected 
concession.  Culpeper  pretended  to  believe  that  the  desired 
cessation  would  be  of  no  real  benefit  to  the  planters,  but  it  is 
clear  that  he  was  consciously  betraying  the  colony  to  the  greed 
of  the  royal  Exchequer. ^^  "I  soe  encouraged  the  planting  of 
tobacco,"  he  reported  to  the  Privy  Council  ,"that  if  the  season 
continue  to  be  favorable  .  .  .  there  will  bee  a  greater  cropp 
by  far  than  ever  grew  since  its  first  seating.  And  I  am  con- 
fident that  Customs  next  year  from  thence  will  be  £50,000  more 
than  ever  heretofore  in  any  one  year."®^  Immediately  after,  he 
declared  that  he  well  knew  "that  the  great  Cropp  then  in  hand 
would  most  certainly  bring  that  place  into  the  utmost  exigen- 

"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-157.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-158. 

**  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-1S9.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-76,  17,  163. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-164.  "  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-164. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  239 

cies  again",  and  he  promised  to  be  prepared  to  quell  the  dis- 
turbances that  would  result.®* 

Before  Lord  Culpeper  left  England  an  order  had  been  deliv- 
ered to  him  "commanding  that  noe  Govemour  of  his  Majesty's 
Plantations,  doe  come  into  England  from  his  Government", 
without  first  obtaining  leave  from  the  King.®^  But  so  loath 
was  he  to  remain  long  in  Virginia,  that  as  soon  as  he  had 
dispatched  the  business  of  the  April  court,  he  once  more  set 
sail  for  England.  "I  judged  it  a  proper  time,"  he  said,  "to 
make  a  step  home  this  easy  quiet  year,  not  out  of  any  fondness 
to  bee  in  England,  .  .  .  but  for  the  King's  service  only."*® 

But  Charles  and  the  Privy  Council  were  weary  of  Culpeper's 
neglect  of  duty.  They  decided  to  rid  themselves  of  so  un- 
trustworthy an  officer  and  to  appoint  in  his  place  a  man  that 
would  remain  in  the  colony  and  carry  out  their  wishes  and 
policies.  An  inquisition  was  held  upon  his  conduct,  and  his 
letters  patent  as  Governor-General  were  declared  void*^  On 
the  28th  of  September,  1683,  a  commission  as  Lieutenant-  and 
Governor-General  of  Virginia  was  granted  to  Lord  Howard  of 
Effingham,®^ 

Few  British  colonial  Governors  are  less  deserving  of  respect 
than  Thomas  Lord  Culpeper.  He  was  insensible  of  any  obli- 
gation to  guard  the  welfare  of  the  people  of  Virginia,  and  was 
negligent  in  executing  the  commands  of  the  King.  He  seems 
to  have  regarded  his  office  only  as  an  easy  means  of  securing  a 
large  income,  and  he  was  untiring  in  his  efforts  to  extort  money 
from  the  exhausted  and  impoverished  colony.  Sir  William 
Berkeley's  salary  as  Governor  had  been  £1,000,  but  Culpeper 
demanded  and  received  no  less  than  £2,000.®^  In  addition,  he 
was  allowed  £150  a  year  in  lieu  of  a  residence,  received  pay  as 
captain  of  infantry  and  claimed  large  sums  under  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Arlington-Culpeper  grant. 

Nor  did  he  scruple  to  resort  to  open  fraud  in  satis fjnng  his 
greed.     There  were,  in   1680,  two  companies  remaining  in 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COS-13S6-164,  169.  "  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-87. 

-P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-168,  169. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-188,  239,  244,  114. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-188. 

•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-56,  145,  146. 


\\ 


240  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUAiRTS 

Virginia  of  the  troops  sent  over  to  suppress  Bacon's  Rebellion. 
Having  received  no  pay  for  many  months,  the  soldiers  were 
discontented  and  mutinous.'^^  The  Privy  Council  entrusted  to 
Culpeper,  upon  his  first  departure  for  the  colony,  money  to 
satisfy  them,  and  to  compensate  the  householders  with  whom 
they  had  been  quartered. "^^  At  this  period,  as  always  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  there  was  a  great  scarcity  of  specie  in 
Virginia.  But  there  circulated,  usually  by  weight,  various 
foreign  coins,  the  most  common  of  which  was  the  Spanish 
piece  of  eight,  about  equal  in  value  to  five  shillings  in  English 
money.  My  Lord,  upon  his  arrival,  industriously  bought  up  all 
the  worn  coins  he  could  secure,  arbitrarily  proclaimed  them 
legal  tender  at  the  ratio  of  six  shillings  to  one  piece  of  eight, 
and  then  paid  the  soldiers  and  the  landlords.  This  ingenious 
trick  probably  netted  him  over  £1,000.  Later  he  restored  the 
ratio  to  five  to  one,  so  that  he  would  lose  nothing  when  his 
own  salary  became  due.  Of  such  stuff  were  some  of  the  Vir- 
ginia colonial  govemors.'^^ 

But  Culpeper's  many  defects  were  not  wholly  unfortunate 
for  the  colony,  for  they  rendered  him  unfit  to  carry  out  the 
designs  of  the  King.  His  frequent  absences  from  his  govern- 
ment made  it  impossible  for  him  to  become  thoroughly  ac- 
quainted with  conditions  in  the  colony,  or  to  bind  the  wealthy 
to  him  by  a  judicious  use  of  the  patronage.  He  was  too  weak, 
too  careless  to  pursue  a  long  continued  attack  upon  the  estab- 
lished privileges  of  the  people. 

It  boded  ill,  therefore,  for  Virginia,  when  he  was  removed, 
and  a  commission  granted  to  Lord  Howard.    The  new  Gover- 

l^nor  was  well  fitted  for  the  task  of  oppression  and  coersion. 

*  Unscrupulous,  deceitful,  overbearing,  resentful,  persistent,  he 
proved  a  dangerous  foe  to  the  representative  institutions  of 
the  colony,  and  an  able  defender  of  royal  prerogative.  Had  he 
not  encountered  throughout  his  entire  administration,  the 
united  and  determined  resistance  of  the  Burgesses,  he  might 
have  overthrown  all  constitutional  government.  Well  it  was 
for  Virginia  that  at  this  moment  of  imminent  danger,. the  Bur- 

'•P.  R.  O.,  005-1376-267. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COi-42-152;  CO391.2-276. 

"  Beverley. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  241 

gesses  should  have  been  so  conscious  of  their  duty  and  so 
resolute  in  executing  it.  They  were  still,  as  in  most  periods 
of  colonial  history,  men  of  high  social  position,  but  they  repre- 
sented, not  their  own  class,  but  the  entire  colony.  And  they 
were  ever  watchful  to  guard  the  interests  of  the  commons. 

Effingham  took  the  oath  of  office  in  England,  October  24, 
1683,'^^  and  a  few  months  later  sailed  for  the  colony.''^^     No  j 
sooner  had  he  set  foot  in  Virginia  than  the  struggle  with  the  1 
Burgesses  began.     The  session  of  Assembly  of  April,  1684,  I 
was  filled  with  their  bitter  disputes.  ' 

Consternation  reigned  in  the  House  when  Lord  Howard 
produced  an  instruction  from  the  King  forbidding  appeals  from 
the  inferior  courts  to  the  Assembly. '^^  As  early  as  October, 
1678,  Colonel  Francis  Moryson  had  advised  the  Privy  Council 
to  abolish  the  judicial  powers  of  the  Assembly,  claiming  that 
they  were  the  source  of  the  great  influence  and  "arrogancy"  of 
that  body."^^  Their  Lordships  did  not  awaken  at  once  to  the 
importance  of  this  matter,  but  before  long  they  became  con- 
vinced that  Moryson  was  right.  Accordingly  Lord  Culpeper, 
in  his  commission  of  1682,  was  directed  to  procure  the  imme- 
diate repeal  of  all  laws  "allowing  appeals  to  the  Assembly".''"^ 
But  Culpeper,  interested  only  in  securing  money  from  the  Bur- 
gesses, failed  to  put  this  instruction  into  operation.  "As  to 
what  concerns  Appeals,"  he  declared,  "I  have  never  once  per- 
mitted any  one  to  come  to  the  Assembly,  soe  that  the  thing 
is  in  effect  done.  But  having  some  thoughts  of  getting  a 
Revenue  Bill  to  pass,  I  was  unwilling  actually  to  repeal  ye 
Laws  relating  thereunto  till  the  next  session  of  Assembly 
should  be  over,  well  knowing  how  infinitely  it  would  trouble 
them."^8 

But  Effingham  had  no  such  scruples,  and  told  the  Burgesses 
plainly  the  commands  he  bore  from  the  King.'''^  The  House,  in 
great  dismay,  requested  the  Governor  and  the  Council  to  join 
them  in  an  address  to  his  Majesty,  imploring  him  to  restore 
a  privilege  which  had  so  long  been  enjoyed  "according  to  ye 

"P.  R.  0;  COs-1356-244,  245.  '*P.  R.  O..  CO5-1356-248. 

"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1684,  pp.  23,  24.  "P.  R.  O.,  CO1-42-138,  139. 

"P.  R.  O.,  COS-1356-S3.  '"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-142. 
'"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-226. 


242  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

Laws  and  antient  Practice  of  the  Country". ^^  Biit  Lord 
Howard  replied  coldly,  "It  is  what  I  can  in  noe  parte  admitt 
of,  his  Majesty  haveing  been  pleased  by  his  Royal  instruccons 
to  direct  &  command  that  noe  appeales  be  open  to  the  General 
Assembly."^^ 

Nor  did  the  Assembly  ever  regain  this  important  power. 
As  late  as  1691  we  find  the  agent  of  the  Burgesses  in  England 
asking  in  vain  for  the  restoration  of  the  right  of  appeals. ^^ 
The  change  threw  into  the  hands  of  the  Governor  and  Council 
extraordinary  power  over  the  judiciary  of  the  colony.  The 
county  justices,  who  sat  in  the  lower  courts,  were  the  appoin- 
tees of  the  Governor,  and  could  not  effectually  resist  his  will. 
Moreover,  as  appeals  lay  from  them  to  the  General  Court, 
they  were  powerless  before  the  decisions  of  the  superior  tri- 
bunal. Thus  the  judiciary  of  the  colony  lost  its  only  democratic 
feature. 

The  Burgesses,  undismayed  by  their  defeat  in  this  matter,  at 
this  same  session  entered  a  vigorous  protest  against  the  King's 
right  to  annul  acts  of  Assembly.  During  Berkeley's  admin- 
istration his  Majesty  had  seldom  exercised  this  power,  but  of 
late  many  acts  had  been  repealed  by  proclamation  without  the 
consent  or  knowledge  of  the  Assembly.  This,  the  Burgesses 
claimed,  was  an  unwarranted  infringement  upon  the  privi- 
leges granted  them  "by  sundry  Comissions,  Letters  and 
Instructions",  that  was  most  destructive  of  their  cherished 
liberties  and  rights.  And  they  demanded  that  henceforth 
their  statutes  should  have  the  force  of  law  until  they  had  been 
"Repealed  by  the  same  Authority  of  Generall  Assembly".®^ 
But  they  received  no  encouragement  from  the  Governor. 
What  you  ask,  he  told  them,  "is  soe  great  an  entrenchment 
upon  ye  Royall  authority  that  I  cannot  but  wonder  you  would 
offer  at  it".«^ 

Thereupon  the  House  determined  to  appeal  directly  to  the 
King,  petitioning  him  not  only  to  give  up  the  right  of  repeal- 
ing laws  by  proclamation,  but  to  permit  the  continuation  of 
appeals   to  the   Assembly.      Since  the   Governor  refused   to 

"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1684,  p.  17.  ""Jour,  H.  of  B.,  1684,  p.  42. 

"* Justice  in  Va.,  p.  25.  "Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1684,  p.  114. 

"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1684,  p.  159. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  243 

transmit  their  address  to  his  Majesty,  they  forwarded  copies 
to  Secretary  Jenkins  by  two  of  their  own  members — Thomas 
Milner  and  William  Sherwood.®^ 

This  address  received  scant  consideration  from  the  King 
and  the  Privy  Council.  ''Whereas,"  James  II  wrote  Effing- 
ham in  October,  1685,  "it  hath  been  represented  unto  us  by 
our  Committee  for  Trade  and  Plantations,  that  they  have 
received  from  some  unknown  persons  a  paper  entitled  an 
address  and  supplication  of  the  General  Assembly  of  Vir- 
ginia .  .  .  which  you  had  refused  to  recommend  as  being 
unfit  to  be  presented.  .  .  .  Wee  cannot  but  approve  of  your 
proceedings.  .  .  .  And  wee  doe  further  direct  you  to  dis- 
countenance such  undue  practices  for  the  future  as  alsoe  the 
Contrivers  and  Promoters  thereof."®®  For  their  activity  in 
this  matter  Sherwood  and  Milner  "in  ye  following  year  were 
both  turned  out  of  all  imployments  to  their  great  damage  and 
disgrace".  ^'^ 

In  the  spring  of  1685  Effingham  received  notification  from 
the  Privy  Council  of  the  death  of  Charles  II  and  the  accession 
of  the  Duke  of  York  as  James  II.®*  He  replied  a  few  days 
later,  "I  have,  with  the  greatest  solemnity  this  place  is  capable 
of  proclaimed  his  Majesty  King  James  II  in  all  the  consider- 
able places  of  this  colony,  where  the  great  Acclamations  and 
Prayers  of  the  People  gave  a  universal  Testimony  of  their 
Obedience."®^  Despite  these  outward  manifestations  of  joy, 
the  people  were  by  no  means  pleased  to  have  a  Roman  Catholic 
monarch  upon  the  English  throne.  When  news  reached 
Virginia  that  the  Duke  of  Monmouth  was  in  open  rebellion,  and 
had  gained  important  successes  over  his  Majesty's  forces,  there 
was  grave  danger  that  the  commons  of  the  colony  might 
espouse  his  cause.®^  Many  were  so  emboldened,  wrote  Effing- 
ham, "that  their  tongues  ran  at  large  and  demonstrated  the 
wickedness  of  their  hearts,  till  I  secured  some  and  deterred 
others  from  spreading  such  false  reports  by  my  Proclama- 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-299,  301.  "•  P.  R.  O.,  COS-1357-S8. 

"McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  88.  "P.  R.  O.,  COs-1356-316. 

"«•  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-328. 
»*  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-79,  80,  95,  96;  Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1685,  p.  49. 


V 


VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 


tion".^^    The  defeat  and  execution  of  the  Duke  of  Monmouth 
for  a  time  ended  all  thought  of  resistance  to  the  King. 

But  Effingham  found  the  people  sullen  and  discontented  and 

the  Burgesses  more  stubborn  than  ever.     The  session  of  As- 

fsembly  of  1685  was,  perhaps,  the  most  stormy  ever  held  in 

j  Virginia.    The  House  made  a  strenuous  and  successful  resis- 

j  tance  to  a  vigorous  attempt  to  deprive  it  of  its  control  over 

I  taxation.    In  1662,  when  the  Assembly  was  dominated  by  Sir 

William  Berkeley,  an  act  had  been  passed  empowering  the 

Governor  and  Council  to  levy  annually  for  three  years  a  tax 

of  not  more  than  twenty  pounds  of  tobacco  per  poll.®^     In 

1680  the  Council  had  requested  Lord  Culpeper  to  represent  to 

the  King  the  disadvantages  of  leaving  taxation  entirely  in  the 

hands  of  the  Assembly,  hoping  that  his  Majesty  would  by 

proclamation  revive  the  law  of   1662.^^     The  greatest  item 

of  expense  to  the  government,  they  argued,  arose  from  the 

Assembly  itself,   "ye  charge  of  which  hath  been  too  often 

found  to  be  twice  as  much  as  would  have  satisfied  all  publiq 

dues".^^     The  matter  was  presented  to  the  consideration  of 

the  Burgesses  in  1680,  but  was  lost  in  the  committee  room.^^ 

The  King  and  Privy  Council,  although  they  approved  of  the 
levy  by  the  Governor  and  the  Council,  did  not  venture  to 
grant  them  that  power  by  royal  proclamation.  They  in- 
structed Lord  Howard,  however,  in  his  commission  of  1683, 
to  propose  for  passage  in  the  Assembly  a  law  similar  to  that 
of  1662.^^  Accordingly,  in  1684,  Effingham  placed  the  matter 
before  the  Burgesses  and  told  them  that  it  was  the  King's 
desire  that  they  give  their  consent.  But  they  ignored  his 
message,  and  the  Governor  could  not  press  the  matter  at  that 
time.  In  the  next  session,  however,  he  became  more  insistent. 
"I  must  remind  you,"  he  told  the  Burgesses,  "of  what  was 
omitted  in  ye  last  Assembly  .  .  .  that  a  Law  may  passe 
whereby  His  Majesty's  Governor  with  ye  advice  of  ye  Coun- 
cil may  be  empowered  to  lay  a  levy."^'^     But  the  Burgesses 

•^  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-80. 

"Hen.,  Vol.  II,  p.  24;  P  R.  O.,  CO5-1376-281. 

"^'P.  R.  O.,  €05-1376-281. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1376-281 ;  CO5-1356-101. 

"  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1376-362.  ••  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-267. 

•^  Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1685. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  24S 

would  not  yield.  "The  House,"  they  replied,  ".  .  .  do 
humbly  signifye  to  your  Excellency,  that  they  can  noe  waies 
concede  to  or  comply  with  that  proposition,  without  apparent 
and  signal  violation  of  ye  great  trust  with  them  reposed."^* 
And  when  Effingham  urged  them  to  reconsider  their  action, 
they  passed  a  resolution  unanimously  refusing  to  relinquish 
this  their  greatest  privilege. 

After  the  prorogation  of  the  Assembly,  Lord  Howard  wrote 
home  his  complaints  ag^ainst  the  stubborn  Burgesses.  "Your 
Lordships,"  he  said,  "will  .  .  .  find  their  total  denyal  that 
the  Governor  and  Council  should  have  any  power  to  lay  the 
least  Levy  to  ease  the  necessity  of  soe  frequent  Assem- 
blys.  .  .  .  This  was  propounded  by  mee  to  them  before  his 
Majesty's  Instructions  came  to  my  hand  that  I  should,  .  .  . 
but  nothing  would  prevail  nor  I  beleeve  will,  unless  his  Ma- 
jesty's special  command  therein. "^^ 

A  long  and  acrimonious  quarrel  occurred  over  the  quit-rents. 
Because  of  the  lack  of  specie  in  the  colony,  it  had  always  been 
necessary  to  collect  this  tax,  when  it  was  collected  at  all,  in 
tobacco.  In  March,  1662,  the  Assembly  had  passed  a  law 
fixing  the  rate  of  payment  at  two  pence  a  pound,  which  was 
then  not  far  from  the  current  price.  But  the  decline  in 
value  of  the  commodity  which  had  occurred  since  1662,  had 
resulted  in  a  great  diminution  in  the  tax. 

In  July,  1684,  the  King  wrote  Effingham  that  he  had  taken 
over  all  the  rights  of  Arlington  and  Culpeper  to  the  quit-rents, 
and  announced  it  his  intention  to  use  them  for  the  support  of 
the  Virginia  government.  He  directed  the  Governor  to  secure 
the  repeal  of  the  law  of  1662  and  to  forbid  all  payments  in 
tobacco.  "You  must  .  .  .  impower,"  he  wrote,  "the  Officers 
of  our  Revenue  to  collect  (them)  .  .  .  according  to  ye  reser- 
vation of  2s  per  every  hundred  acres  ...  to  be  paid  in  specie, 
that  is  in  Mony."io« 

As  tobacco  sold,  in  1684,  at  a  half  penny  a  pound,  this  order, 
had  it  been  put  into  operation,  would  have  quadrupled  the 
value  of  the  quit-rents,  and  increased  materially  the  burdens 

"'Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1685.  -P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-85. 

'~P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-282. 


246  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

of  the  planters.  The  Burgesses,  in  alarm,  petitioned  the  Gov- 
ernor to  allow  the  old  arrangement  to  continue,  declaring  that 
the  lack  of  specie  made  it  impossible  to  comply  with  the  King's 
order.    And  they  refused  to  repeal  the  law  of  March,  1662. 

Displeased  at  their  obstinacy,  the  King,  in  August,  1686, 
nullified  the  law  by  proclamation.  "Being  now  informed," 
he  declared,  "that  several  persons  goe  about  to  impede  our 
Service  ...  by  imposing  bad  tobacco  upon  our  collectors  at 
the  rate  of  2d  per  lib,  under  pretence  of  an  Act  of  Assembly 
of  March  30,  1662,  .  .  .  Wee  have  thought  fit  to  Repeal  the 
said  Acf'ioi 

Even  then  the  Burgesses  resisted.  At  the  session  of  1686 
they  petitioned  on  behalf  of  all  the  freeholders  of  the  colony 
that  the  quit-rents  should  be  paid  as  formerly.  To  make  pay- 
ment in  specie,  they  declared,  would  not  only  be  ruinous,  but 
utterly  impossible.  ^"^  So  angered  were  they  and  so  deter- 
mined not  to  obey,  that  Effingham  found  it  expedient  to  con- 
sent to  a  compromise.  It  was  agreed  that  the  tax  should  be 
collected  in  tobacco  as  before,  but  at  the  rate  of  one  penny 
per  pound,  which,  as  Effingham  said,  was  not  ad  valorum. 
Thus  the  only  result  of  this  long  quarrel  was  to  double  the 
value  of  the  quit-rents,  and  to  add  greatly  to  the  burdens  of  the 
impoverished  and  discontented  people.  ^^'^ 

Even  more  bitter  was  the  contest  over  the  so-called  Bill  of 
Ports.  This  measure  was  designed  to  remedy  the  scattered 
mode  of  living  in  Virginia,  by  appointing  certain  places  as 
ports  of  landing  and  shipment,  and  confining  to  them  all  for- 
eign trade.  Throughout  the  seventeenth  century  almost  all 
shipping  was  done  from  private  wharves.  The  country  was  so 
interspersed  with  rivers,  inlets  and  creeks,  deep  enough  to 
float  the  largest  vessels,  that  ports  were  entirely  unnecessary. 
Each  planter  dealt  directly  with  the  merchants,  receiving  Eng- 
lish manufactured  goods  almost  at  his  front  door,  and  lading 
the  ships  with  tobacco  from  his  own  warehouse.  This  sys- 
tem, so  natural  and  advantageous,  seemed  to  the  English 
Kings,  and  even  to  the  colonists,  a  sign  of  unhealthful  con- 

"^P.   R.   O.,   CO5-1357-113.  "'Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1686.  p.  17. 

'•*Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1686,  p.  yj. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  247 

ditions.  More  than  once  attempts  had  been  made  to  force  the 
people  to  build  towns  and  to  discontinue  the  desultory  planta- 
tion trade. 

In  1679,  Culpeper  was  ordered  to  propose  a  law  in  the  As- 
sembly requiring  the  erection  of  towns  on  each  great  river, 
to  which  all  foreign  trade  should  be  confined.  Accordingly, 
in  1680,  a  Bill  of  Ports  was  passed.  "Wee  are  now  grown 
sensible,"  wrote  Secretary  Spencer,  "that  our  present  necessi- 
ties, and  too  much  to  be  doubted  future  miseries,  are  much 
heightened  by  our  wild  and  rambling  way  of  living,  therefore 
are  desirous  of  cohabitation,  in  order  whereunto  in  ye  late 
Assembly  an  Act  was  made  appointing  a  town  in  every 
County,  where  all  Goods  imported  are  to  be  landed,  and  all 
Goods  exported  to  be  shipt  off.  And  if  this  takes  effect,  as 
its  hoped  it  may,  Virginia  will  then  go  forward  which  of  late 
years  hath  made  a  retrograde  motion."^"'* 

But  this  attempt  ended  in  dismal  failure.  In  1681,  when 
the  shipmasters  came  to  the  appointed  ports,  they  found  that 
no  shelter  had  been  constructed  for  their  goods.  Thinking  the 
law  nullified,  or  not  yet  in  operation,  they  traded  as  usual  from 
private  wharves.  For  this  breach  of  the  law,  some  of  them 
were  prosecuted  in  the  colonial  courts,  to  their  own  great  loss 
and  to  the  inconvenience  of  many  of  the  planters.  ^"'^  Loud 
wrangling  and  bitter  animosities  resulted  throughout  the 
colony,  and  at  length  the  King  was  compelled  to  suspend  the 
law.i«» 

In  the  Assembly  of  1685  it  was  proposed  to  enact  another 
Bill  of  Ports.  Accordingly  an  act  was  drafted  in  the  House 
of  Burgesses  and,  in  due  time,  sent  up  for  the  approval  of  the 
Council.  The  upper  house,  after  making  several  alterations, 
consented  to  the  bill  and  returned  it  to  the  Burgesses.  The 
latter  agreed  to  most  of  the  changes,  but  struck  out  a  clause 
restricting  the  towns  to  two  upon  each  river,  and  added  an 
amendment  permitting  one  port  to  a  county. ^^'^  The  Council 
in  turn  yielded,  but  inserted  a  new  clause,  "That  there  should 
bee  ffees  ascertained  on  Goods  exported  and  imported  for  the 


IM 


P.  R.  O.,  COs-1355-383.  "'  P.  R.  0„  CO5-13S6-177. 

P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1356-4.  '""P.  R.  O.,  COs-1407-310,  282. 


248  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUA/RTS 

support  of  those  Officers  which  should  bee  obHged  to  reside 
in  those  Ports".^^^  As  "there  was  noe  room  in  ye  margint  to 
write  ye  alteration  ...  it  was  wrote  in  a  piece  of  paper  and 
affixt  to  ye  Act".^^^  When  the  bill  came  back  to  the  House, 
Major  Robert  Beverley,  who  was  again  the  clerk  of  the  Assem- 
bly, acting  it  would  seem  upon  his  own  initiative,  tore  off  the 
paper  containing  this  amendment.  The  bill  then  came  before 
the  House  apparently  assented  to  without  change  and  was 
returned  by  them  for  the  signature  of  the  Governor  and  the 
Councillors.  Neither  Effingham  nor  any  of  the  Council  noticed 
the  omission,  and  thinking  their  amendment  had  been  accepted, 
signed  the  bill.^^^  Thereupon  it  was  engrossed,  and  sent  up 
for  the  final  signature  of  the  Governor.  But  Effingham  in 
reading  the  engrossed  copy,  discovered  the  omission,  and  re- 
fused to  affix  his  name  to  the  bill,  claiming  that  it  "was  not 
engrost  as  assented  to"  by  him  and  the  Council.^^^  "To  which," 
wrote  the  Governor,  "they  sent  mee  word  that  the  Bill  could 
admit  of  noe  alteration  or  amendment  after  it  was  attested  by 
the  Clerk  of  the  General  Assembly  as  assented  to,  and  that  it 
had  by  that  the  force  of  a  Law.  ...  I  sent  them  word  again 
that  though  any  bill  was  assented  to  by  mee  and  the  Council,  yet 
if  I  should  afterwards  perseive  it  would  prove  prejudicial  .  .  . 
I  had  power  to  refuse  the  signing  of  it  by  vertue  of  His  Ma- 
jesty's negative  voice.  .  .  .  But  all  would  not  persuade  them 
out  of  their  obstinacy,  nay  tho'  I  offered  to  lay  that  Bill  aside 
till  His  Majesty's  pleasure  should  bee  known  therein;  And  to 
sign  all  the  others.  .  ,  .  But  nothing  would  please  them  but 
Invading,  if  not  destroying.  His  Majesty's  Prerogative."  The 
Burgesses  declared  that  they  did  not  contest  the  Governor's  right 
to  the  veto,  but  contended  that  when  once  he  signed  a  bill,  "it 
could  not  faile  of  having  ye  force  of  a  Law".^^^  Effingham, 
they  complained,  was  claiming  a  "double  negative  Voice".  So 
angry  did  they  become  that  they  refused  to  apportion  the  levy 
for  defraying  the  public  charges,  and  after  many  days  o£ 
bitter  contention  the  Governor  was  forced  to  prorogue  them. 

""P.  R.  O.,  COS-I3S7-89.  "' P-  R-  O.,  CO5-1407-310. 

"•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-89.  '"P.  R.   O.,   COs-1357-89. 

»"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1685. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  249 

"I  did  not  disolve  them,"  he  wrote  the  Privy  Council,  "for 
these  reasons.  Because  if  his  Majesty  shall  think  fitt  to  have 
them  dissolved,  it  will  bee  soe  great  a  rebuke  to  them,  when 
done  by  his  Majesty's  special  command,  that  I  hope  it  will 
deter  them  for  the  future  to  bee  soe  obstinate  and  peevish."^^^ 
Accordingly,  in  August,  1686,  the  King  wrote  the  Governor, 
"Whereas,  we  have  been  informed  of  ye  irregular  and  tumul- 
tuous proceedings  of  the  House  of  Burgesses  of  Virginia,  at 
their  late  meeting,  the  members  thereof  having  .  .  .  presumed 
so  far  as  to  raise  contests  touching  ye  power  of  ye  Negative 
Voice  .  .  .  which  wee  cannot  attribute  to  any  other  Cause 
then  the  disaffected  &  unquiet  Dispositions  of  those  ■  Mem- 
bers. .  .  ,  Wee  have  thought  fitt  hereby  as  a  mark  of  our 
displeasure  ...  to  Charge  .  .  .  you  forthwith  to  Dissolve  the 
present  Assembly."^^^ 

When  this  order  reached  Virginia  the  Assembly  was  again 
in  session.  "After  I  had  passed  the  Acts,"  wrote  Effingham,  "I 
ordered  His  Majesty's  Letter  to  bee  publickly  read  to  them,  and 
then  Dissolved  them  .  .  .  and  told  them  they  were  the  first 
Assembly  which  had  been  soe  dissolved  and  I  hoped  they 
would  bee  the  last  that  should  deserve  it.  I  ordered  copies  of 
his  Majesty's  Letter  to  bee  sent  to  the  several  County-Courts, 
that  all  the  Inhabitants  might  know  how  displeasing  such  pro- 
ceedings were  to  his  Majesty."^^^  "And  now,"  he  added,  "the 
public  debts  being  paid,  ...  I  shall  not  for  the  future  have 
soe  frequent  Assemblys."^^^ 

More  damaging  to  the  Burgesses  than  this  rebuke  was  the 
loss  of  the  right  to  elect  their  own  clerk.  "I  was  severely 
angry  with  their  Clerk,"  declared  Effingham,  "that  he  durst 
omit  ye  least  clause,  especially  soe  material  an  one  ...  I  sent 
to  the  Assembly  to  make  him  an  example  for  it,  But  they 
rather  maintained  him."^^'''  Some  months  later  the  King  sent 
orders  that  Beverley  be  tried  for  defacing  the  records  and  that 
he  be  once  more  deprived  of  all  offices.  Probably  because  of 
his  great  popularity,  Beverley  was  never  brought  to  trial,  but 

"*P.   R.   O.,   COs-1357-93.  "*P.  R.  O.,  COS-I3S7-II9. 

"=  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-127.  "'  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-133. 

"'P.  R.  O.,  COS-I3S7-92;  McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  222. 


250  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

he  was  forced  to  relinquish  his  lucrative  governmental  posts. ^^^ 
In  May,  1686,  Nicholas  Spencer  wrote  the  Committee  of 
Trade  and  Plantations,  advocating  the  appointment  of  the 
clerk  by  the  Governor.  "I  .  .  .  beg  leave  to  present,"  he 
said,  "how  necessary  it  is  .  .  .  that  the  clerk  of  the  House  .  .  . 
bee  commissionated  by  his  Majesty's  Governour  .  .  .  and  that 
his  salary  be  appointed  unto  him  out  of  his  Majesty's  revenue. 
This  will  take  off  his  dependency  on  his  great  masters  the 
House  of  Burgesses,  and  leave  noe  room  for  designed  omis- 
sions."^^® Nothing  loath,  the  King,  in  August,  1686,  wrote 
Lord  Howard,  "Wee  .  .  .  require  you  .  .  .  upon  the  Con- 
vening of  the  Assembly  to  appoint  a  fit  person  to  execute  the 
Office  of  Clerk  of  the  House  of  Burgesses,  &  not  to  permit 
upon  any  pretense  whatsoever  any  other  person  to  execute  ye 
said  Office  but  such  as  shall  bee  soe  chosen  by  you."^^^ 

Accordingly,  at  the  session  of  April,  1688,  the  Governor, 
with  the  approbation  of  the  Council,  appointed  Captain  Fran- 
cis Page  as  clerk  of  the  House. ^^^  The  Burgesses  could  but 
yield,  but  they  told  Effingham  that  the  clerk  was  still  their 
servant  and  ought  to  take  the  usual  oath  of  secrecy.  "I  do 
declare,"  replied  the  Governor,  "it  was  never  my  intention  nor 
my  desire  that  the  Clerk  should  be  as  a  spy  upon  your  Actions 
and  to  declare  to  me  your  private  Debates."  It  was  therefore 
agreed  that  he  should  take  the  following  oath:  "You  shall 
keep  secret  all  private  Debates  of  the  said  House  of  Bur- 
gesses."^^^  Despite  this,  it  was  quite  evident  that  the  House 
was  no  longer  to  be  master  of  its  own  clerk,  and  that  he  was 
to  be  in  the  future,  to  some  extent  at  least,  an  emissary  of  the 
enemy  seated  in  their  midst. 

The  resolute  and  vigilant  defense  of  the  constitutional  rights 
of  Virginia  made  by  the  House  in  this  the  critical  period  of  her 
history  is  deserv'ing  of  the  highest  praise,  because  it  was  made 
in  the  face  of  vigorous  personal  attacks  by  Effingham  upon  the 
most  active  of  the  members.  Every  Burgess  that  voted  against 
the  measures  proposed  by  the  King  or  advocated  by  his  Gov- 

"' Sains.,  Vol.  XV,  p.  30.  ""  McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  229. 

"•P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-119.  "'Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  i. 

'"Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  17. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  '    251 

ernor,  exposed  himself  not  only  to  removal  from  office,  but 
to  active  persecution.  As  we  have  seen,  Mr.  William  Sher- 
wood and  Colonel  Thomas  Milner,'  for  forwarding  to  the 
Privy  Council  the  address  of  the  Burgesses  in  1684,  had  been 
dismissed  from  office. ^^^  "In  ye  year  1686  Mr,  Arthur  Allen 
&  Mr.  John  Smith,  who  were  Burgesses  in  ye  year  1685,  were 
turned  out  of  all  imployment  Civill  &  Military  to  Mr.  Allen's 
great  damage,  he  being  a  surveyor  of  land  at  that  tyme."^^*  I 
have  displaced  Allen,  wrote  Effingham,  because  he  was  "a  great 
promoter  of  those  differences  between  mee  and  the  Assembly 
concerning  the  King's  negative  Voice  ...  as  not  thinking  it 
fitt  that  those  who  are  peevishly  opposite  to  his  Majesty's  in- 
terest should  have  any  advantage  by  his  favor". ^^^  "In  the 
year  1688  Mr.  William  Anderson,  a  member  of  ye  Assembly 
in  that  year  was  soon  after  the  Assembly  by  the  Governor's 
order  and  Command  put  in  ye  Common  goale  and  there  de- 
tained 7  months,  without  Tryal,  though  often  prayed  for,  and 
several  courts  past  in  ye  time  of  his  imprisonment.  Nor  could 
he  obtain  ye  benefit  of  habeas  corpus  upon  his  humble  peti- 
tion. .  .  .  Mr.  Charles  Scarburgh,  a  member  of  that  As- 
sembly, alsoe  was,  soon  after  ye  Assembly,  turned  out  of  all 
imployment  and  as  a  mark  of  his  Lordship's  displeasure,  a 
command  was  sent  to  ye  clerk  of  ye  county  to  raze  his  name 
out  of  ye  records  as  a  Justice  of  Peace."^26  "prom  whence,"  it 
was  declared,  "the  people  conclude  these  severities  are  inflicted 
rather  as  a  terrour  to  others  than  for  any  personall  crimes  of 
their  owne,  and  is  of  such  ruinous  consequence  that  either  the 
public  or  particular  interests  must  fall,  for  if  none  oppose, 
the  country  must  languish  under  the  severity  of  the  govern- 
ment, or  fly  into  a  mutiny  to  save  themselves  from  starving. 
If  any  do  appear  more  zealous  in  prosecuting  the  countries  com- 
plaints they  know  what  to  expect.     It  being  observable  that 

""  Sains.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  254.  "*McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  26. 

"'McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  257.  Some  years  later  Effingham  contradicted 
this  statement.  "They  were  not  dismissed,"  he  said,  "from  their  imploy- 
ments  upon  account  of  their  proceedings  in  ye  Assembly,  but  being 
Justices  of  Peace  they  oppenly  opposed  the  King's  authority  in  naming 
sheriffs  by  his  Governour  alledging  that  office  ought  to  go  by  succession." 

"•McD.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  437-441. 


252  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

none  has  been  thus  punisht  but  those  who  were  forward  in 
the  assembly  to  oppose  the  encroachments  on  the  people,  and' 
promote  the  complaint  to  England,  being  out  of  hope  of  relief 
on  the  place."^^'^ 

One  is  inclined  to  ask,  when  considering  the  incessant  quar- 
rels of  the  Governor  and  the  Burgesses,  why  Lord  Howard  was 
less  successful  than  Governor  Berkeley  had  been  in  gaining  an 
ascendency  over  the  Assembly.  During  the  Restoration  Period 
the  Burgesses  had  worked  in  entire  harmony  with  Sir  Wil- 
liam, even  when  he  advocated  the  oppressive  measures  that 
were  so  instrumental  in  bringing  on  Bacon's  Rebellion.  Effing- 
ham, on  the  other  hand,  found  himself  continually  embroiled 
with  the  Assemblymen,  and  unable  to  force  them  into  sub- 
mission even  with  rebukes  and  persecution. 

The  explanation  must  be  sought  partly  in  the  different  char- 
acters of  the  two  Governors.  Berkeley  was  an  abler  man 
than  Lord  Howard,  more  tactful,  more  capable  of  utilizing  the 
weapons  at  hand.  His  method  of  overwhelming  the  legisla- 
tors with  favors  was  more  effective  in  winning  their  support 
than  intimidation  and  threats.  Moreover,  Sir  William,  him- 
self a  Virginian  by  his  long  residence  in  the  colony,  carried 
out  only  his  own  policies,  and  by  methods  that  did  not  openly 
assail  the  charter  rights  of  the  people.  Effingham,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  the  instrument  of  the  English  King  and  his  Coun- 
cillors in  an  assault  upon  representative  government  in  the 
colony.  It  was  but  natural  that  all  classes,  even  the  wealthy 
planters,  should  resist  him  with  stubborn  resolution.  Nor  was 
it  possible  for  Effingham  to  control,  as  Sir  William  had  done, 
the  elections  of  Burgesses.  The  opposition  of  many  sheriffs, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  preside  at  the  polls,  to  the  administration, 
the  greater  vigilance  of  the  House,  and  the  independent  spirit  of 
the  commons  conspired  to  render  the  returns  more  accurate  and 
the  House  more  responsive  to  the  will  of  the  people.  Finally, 
the  poor  planters  found  now,  what  they  had  lacked  during  the 
Restoration  Period,  cultured  and  able  men  to  represent  them 
in  the  Assembly.  Without  the  aggressive  leadership  of  Major 
Robert  Beverley,  Thomas  Milner,  Colonel  Ballard,  and  other 

""McD.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  437-441. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  253 

prominent  planters,  the  cause  of  the  people  might  have  been 
lost. 

Even  in  the  Council  the  commons  had  one  staunch  friend — 
Colonel  Philip  Ludwell.  This  restless  man,  who  was  unable  to 
work  in  harmony  with  any  Governor  save  Sir  William  Ber- 
keley, sympathized  with  his  old  friends  of  the  Green  Spring 
faction  in  their  resistance  to  Effingham.  As  early  as  1684 
he  had  aroused  the  Governor's  suspicion  by  arguing  in  Council 
"for  the  undutiful  Address  which  was  sent  to  his  Majesty"/^* 
and  during  the  sessions  of  1685  and  1686  it  was  thought  that 
he  was  "an  Instrument  in  Abbetting  and  formenting  those 
Disputes  &  Exceptions  the  Assembly  soe  insisted  on".^^^ 

Soon  after,  the  Governor's  distrust  was  heightened  by  two 
acts  of  favor  shown  by  Ludwell  to  leaders  of  the  opposition  in 
the  House  of  Burgesses.  When  ordered  to  oust  Major  Allen 
from  his  surveyor's  place,  he  gave  it  to  "Major  Swan,  one 
altogether  as  troublesom  as  the  other  &  that  only  ior  the  use 
of  Allen".  Upon  receiving  information  that  the  King  had 
declared  Major  Beverley  "uncapable  of  any  public  imploy- 
ment  .  .  .  hee  presently  gives  his  Surveyor's  place,  the  best 
in  the  Country  to  his  Son".^^*^  In  the  spring  of  1686  the 
Governor  made  one  last  attempt  to  win  Ludwell  over  from  the 
people's  cause.  "I  did,"  he  wrote,  "on  the  death  of  Colonel 
Bridger  .  .  .  give  him  a  collector's  place,  in  hopes  to  have 
gained  him  by  it."^^^  But  Ludwell,  unaffected  by  this  at- 
tempted bribery,  continued  his  active  opposition  to  the  arbitrary 
and  illegal  conduct  of  the  Governor.  At  last,  during  the  ses- 
sion of  Assembly  of  1686,  there  occurred  an  open  breach. 
"His  Lordship  flew  into  a  great  rage  and  told  .  .  .  Ludwell 
he  had  formerly  made  remarks  upon  him,  and  that  if  he  did 
not  look  the  better  to  himself  he  should  shortly  suspend  him 
from  the  Council. "^^^  Early  in  1687  this  threat  was  put  into 
efifect,^^^  and  the  troublesome  Councillor  was  for  the  second 
time  deprived  of  his  seat.  But  this  persecution,  which  the 
people  believed  to  be  directed  against  Ludwell  for  his  support 

""P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-130.  "» CO5-1357-127. 

^"P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-129.  "'P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-130. 

""McD.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  437-441. 

"'Sains.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  226;  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-127. 


254  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

of  their  cause,  brought  him  into  great  popularity  throughout 
the  colony  and  made  him  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  op- 
position to  the  administration.  In  the  elections  for  the  Assem- 
bly of  1688  he  was  chosen  by  the  freeholders  of  James  City 
county  to  represent  them  in  the  House  of  Burgesses. ^^^  Effing- 
ham, however,  would  not  allow  him  to  take  his  seat,  producing 
a  clause  from  his  commission  which  forbade  suspended  Coun- 
cillors to  become  members  of  the  Assembly.  ^^^  Despite  this 
exclusion,  Ludwell  could  and  did,  by  conferences  with  individ- 
ual members,  influence  the  actions  of  the  House  and  lead  them 
in  their  fight  against  the  Governor. 

The  most  important  task  that  confronted  the  Burgesses  when 
they  assembled  in  1 688  was  to  call  the  Governor  to  account  for 
many  burdensome  fees  which  he  had  imposed  upon  the  people 
by  executive  order.  First  in  importance  was  "a  fee  of  200 
pounds  of  tobacco  for  the  Seal  affixed  to  Patents  &  other  public 
instruments". ^^^  This  the  Burgesses  considered  a  tax  im- 
posed without  the  authority  or  consent  of  the  Assembly,  and 
consequently  destructive  of  the  most  cherished  rights  of  the 
people.  Moreover,  it  had,  they  claimed,  deterred  many  from 
using  the  seal  and  had  greatly  impeded  the  taking  up  of  land. 
They  also  protested  against  a  fee  demanded  by  the  "Master 
of  the  Escheat  Office  of  £5  or  looolbs  tobacco",  and  to  one  of 
thirty  pounds  of  tobacco  required  by  the  Secretary  for  record- 
ing surveys  of  land.^^''^  "This  House,"  they  declared,  "upon 
Examination  of  the  many  grievous  Complaints  .  .  .  (have) 
been  fully  convinced  and  made  sensible  that  many  unlawful 
and  unwarrantable  fees  and  other  dutyes  have  been,  under 
colour  of  his  Majesty's  Royal  authority,  unjustly  imposed  .  .  . 
&  that  divers  new  unlawful,  unpresidented  &  very  burthensom 
and  grievous  wayes  &  devises  have  been  of  late  made  use  of 
to  the  great  impoverishing  Vexing  and  utter  undoeing  of 
many  of  his  Majesties  Subjects  of  this  his  Dominion."^^^ 

The  Burgesses  were  also  deeply  concerned  at  an  instance  of 
the  unwarrantable  use  of  the  royal  prerogative.     In  1680  an 

"*  McD.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  437-441 ;  Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  13. 

'"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1355-313;  Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  29. 

"•  P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-218.  "'Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  pp.  82,  83. 

^Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  pp.  82,  83. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  255 

act  had  been  passed  concerning  attorneys.  Two  years  later, 
before  the  act  had  received  the  royal  assent,  it  had  been  re- 
pealed by  the  Assembly.  Later  the  King,  by  proclamation,  had 
made  void  the  act  of  1682,  and  the  Governor  had  insisted  that 
this  revived  the  law  of  1680.  Against  this,  the  Burgesses  in 
1688  entered  a  vigorous  protest.  "A  Law,"  they  declared, 
"may  as  well  Receive  its  beginning  by  proclamation  as  such 
revivall.  .  .  .  Some  Governor  may  be  sent  to  Govern  us  who 
under  the  pretense  of  the  liberty  he  hath  to  construe  preroga- 
tive and  stretch  it  as  far  as  he  pleaseth  may  by  proclamation 
Revive  all  the  Lawes  that  for  their  great  Inconveniences  to  the 
Country  have  been  Repeal'd  through  forty  years  since."^^^ 

The  Burgesses  drew  up  a  long  paper,  setting  forth  their 
many  grievances,  with  the  intention  of  presenting  it  to  the 
Governor.  They  first,  however,  requested  the  Council  to  join 
them  in  their  demand  for  redress.  This  the  Council  with  some 
sharpness,  refused  to  do.  We  are  apprehensive,  they  replied, 
that  the  grievances  "proceed  from  petulent  tempers  of  private 
persons  and  that  which  inclines  us  the  rather  so  to  take  them 
is  from  the  bitterness  of  the  Expressions".^*^  Judging  the 
Governor's  temper  from  this  reply  of  the  Councillors,  the 
Burgesses  relinquished  hope  of  redress  from  the  executive  and 
determined  to  petition  the  King  himself.  An  humble  address 
was  drawn  up,  entrusted  to  Colonel  Philip  Ludwell  and  de- 
livered by  him  at  Windsor,  in  September,  1688,  into  the  hands 
of  James  IL  Before  it  could  be  considered,  however,  William 
of  Orange  had  landed  in  England  and  King  James  had  been 
overthrown.  ^^^ 

In  the  meanwhile  a  crisis  in  Virginia  had  been  approaching 
rapidly.  The  people  felt  that  their  religion,  as  well  as  their 
liberties,  was  menaced  by  the  rule  of  James  II.  In  1685,  the 
King  had  directed  Effingham  "to  permit  a  Liberty  of  Con- 
science to  all  persons",  that  would  "bee  contented  with  a  quiet 
and  peaceable  enjoyment  of  it,  not  giving  offence  or  scan- 
dal".^*^  The  people  of  Virginia  understood  well  enough  that 
this  order  was  dictated,  not  by  considerations  of  liberality,  but 

"•Jour,  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  so.  '^'Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  116. 

"» P.   R.   O.,   CO5-1357-248.  "'  P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-38,  39. 


256  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

by  James'  determination  to  favor  the  Catholic  church.  The 
feeling  of  uneasiness  was  increased  when,  in  1688,  Effingham, 
declaring  it  no  longer  necessary  for  the  Burgesses  to  take  the 
oaths  of  allegiance  and  supremacy,  admitted  a  Catholic  to  the 
Assembly.  ^^^ 

In  October,  1688,  James  sent  word  to  the  Governor  of  the 
impending  invasion  of  the  Prince  of  Orange  and  comiTianded 
him  to  place  Virginia  in  a  posture  of  defense. ^*^  Immediately 
the  colony  was  thrown  into  the  wildest  excitement,  and,  for  a 
time,  it  seemed  probable  that  the  people  would  attempt  the 
expulsion  of  Effingham.  "Unruly  and  unorderly  spiritts,"  the" 
Governor  afterwards  testified,  "laying  hold  of  the  motion  of 
affairs,  and  that  under  the  pretext  of  religion,  .  .  .  betook 
themselves  to  arms."^^^  Wild  rumors  spread  through  the 
colony  that  the  Papists  of  Maryland  were  conspiring  with  the 
Senecas  to  fall  upon  Virginia  and  cut  off  all  Protestants  in  a 
new  Saint  Bartholomew's  Eve.^^^  The  frontiersmen  along 
the  upper  courses  of  the  Rappahannock  and  the  Potomac 
"drawing  themselves  into  parties  upon  their  defense",  were 
"ready  to  fly  in  the  face  of  ye  government.  Soe  that  matters 
were  .  .  .  tending  to  a  Rebellion."  However,  the  news  of 
William's  easy  victory  and  the  flight  of  James  restored  quiet 
to  the  colony.  On  February  the  nineteenth,  1689,  the  Privy 
Council  wrote  the  Governor  that  William  and  Mary  had  as- 
cended the  throne  of  England, ^^^  and  a  few  weeks  later  their 
Majesties  were  proclaimed  at  Jamestown  with  solemnity  and 
thanksgiving.^"*® 

The  Glorious  Revolution  was  a  victory  for  liberty  even  more 
important  to  Virginia  than  to  England.  It  brought  to  an  end 
those  attacks  of  the  English  government  upon  the  represen- 
tative institutions  of  the  colony  that  had  marked  the  past 
ten  years.  It  confirmed  to  the  people  the  rights  that  had 
been  guaranteed  them,  through  a  long  series  of  patents  dating 
back  as  far  as  1606,  and  rendered  impossible  for  all  time  the 
illegal  oppressions  of  such  men  as  Harvey,   Berkeley,   Cul- 

»*»Jour.  H.  of  B.,  1688,  p.  8;  McD.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  437-441. 
•"P.  R.  O.,  COs-1357-229.  '"McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  316. 

"•McD.,  Vol.  VII,  p.  316.  "'P.  R.  O.,  CO5-1357-236. 

"'Sains.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  215. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  257 

peper  and  Effingham.  Other  Governors  of  despotic  disposi- 
tion were  yet  to  rule  Virginia — Nicholson,  Andros,  Dunmore 
— but  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  resort  to  the  tyrannical 
methods  of  some  of  their  predecessors.  The  English  Revolu- 
tion had  weakened  permanently  the  control  of  the  British 
government  over  the  colony,  and  consequently  the  power  of  the 
Governor. 

The  advance  of  liberalism  which  was  so  greatly  accelerated 
both  in  England  and  in  America  by  the  events  of  1688  was 
halted  in  the  mother  country  in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  But  Virginia  and  the  other  colonies  were  not  greatly 
affected  by  the  reaction  upon  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic. 
Here  the  power  of  the  people  grew  apace,  encountering  no 
serious  check,  until  it  came  into  conflict  with  the  sullen  Tory- 
ism of  George  III.  Then  it  was  that  England  sought  to  stifle 
the  liberalism  of  the  colonies,  and  revolution  and  independence 
resulted. 

The  changed  attitude  of  the  Privy  Council  towards  Vir- 
ginia was  made  immediately  apparent  by  the  careful  consider- 
ation given  the  petition  of  the  Burgesses.  Had  James  re- 
mained upon  the  throne  it  is  probable  that  it,  like  the  address 
of  1684,  would  have  been  treated  with  neglect  and  scorn.  But 
William  received  Ludwell  graciously,  listened  to  his  plea  "on 
behalf  of  the  Commons  of  Virginia",  and  directed  the  Com- 
mittee of  Trade  and  Plantations  to  investigate  the  matter  and 
to  see  justice  done.^*® 

Effingham,  who  had  been  called  to  England  upon  private 
business,  appeared  before  the  Committee  to  defend  his  admin- 
istration and  to  refute  Ludwell's  charges.  Despite  his  eflforts, 
several  articles  of  the  petition  were  decided  against  him,  and 
the  most  pressing  grievances  of  the  people  redressed.  The 
"Complaint  touching  the  fee  of  20olbs  of  tobacco  and  cask",  it 
was  reported,  "imposed  by  my  Lord  Howard  for  affixing  the 
Great  Seal  to  Patents  ...  in  regard  it  was  not  regularly 
imposed  .  .  .  the  committee  agree  to  move  his  Majesty  the 
same  be  discontinued".^^**  Similarly  their  Lordships  declared 
in  favor  of  abolishing  the  fee  of  thirty  pounds  of  tobacco 

"'  P.  R.  O,  CO5-1357-247,  248.  "•  Sains.,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  233,  234. 


258  VIRGINIA  UNDER  THE  STUARTS 

required  for  registering  surveys.  The  article  touching  the 
revival  of  repealed  laws  by  proclamation  was  referred  to  the 
consideration  of  the  Attorney-General  and  the  Solicitor-Gen- 
eral, These  officers  gave  it  as  their  opinion  that  his  Majesty 
did  have  the  right,  by  repealing  acts  of  repeal,  to  revive  laws, 
but  the  committee  agreed  to  move  the  King  that  the  Act  of 
Attorneys  should  be  made  void  by  proclamation,  ^^^ 

This  was  a  signal  victory  for  the  Burgesses,  but  Ludwell, 
who  had  personal  scores  to  settle  with  the  Governor,  did  not 
let  matters  drop  here.  After  the  lapse  of  several  months  he 
appeared  once  more  before  the  Committee  with  charges 
against  Effingham  of  misgovernment  and  oppression. ^^^  Re- 
ferring to  the  quarrel  over  the  Bill  of  Ports,  in  1685,  he 
accused  him  of  exercising  "two  negative  voices".  He  com- 
plained bitterly  of  his  attacks  upon  those  Burgesses  that  had 
opposed  him  in  the  Assembly,  and  of  his  abuse  of  the  power 
of  suspending  Councillors,  The  money  arising  from  fort 
duties,  he  said,  which  had  formerly  been  accounted  for  to  the 
Assembly,  had,  during  Effingham's  administration,  "been 
diverted  to  other  uses".  The  Governor  had  established  new 
courts  of  judicature  contrary  to  the  wishes  of  the  people. 

These  persistent  attacks  of  Ludwell  resulted  in  another  vic- 
tory, for  the  Committee  decided  that  Effingham  should  no 
longer  rule  the  colony.  He  was  not  displaced  as  Governor- 
General,  but  he  was  commanded  to  remain  in  England,  and  to 
leave  the  control  of  the  administration  to  a  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor. This,  doubtless,  was  not  unsatisfactory  to  Lord 
Howard,  for  he  retained  a  part  of  his  salary  and  was  relieved 
of  all  the  work  and  responsibility  of  his  office.  The  Lieutenant- 
Governorship  was  given  to  Captain  Francis  Nicholson.  ^^^ 

Thus  the  colony  emerged  triumphant  from  the  Critical 
Period.  It  is  true  the  House  of  Burgesses  had  lost  many  privi- 
leges— ^the  right  to  elect  its  own  clerk,  the  right  to  receive 
judicial  appeals,  the  right  to  control  all  revenues, — but  they 
had  retained  within  their  grasp  that  all-important  power — the 
levying  of  general  taxes.     And  they  had  gained  greatly  in 

"'Sains.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  243.  «* Sains.,  Vol.   IV,  p.  246. 

'^  Sains.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  254. 


THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD  259 

political  experience.  Long  years,  of  watchfulness,  of  resis- 
tance to  encroachments  upon  their  rights,  had  moulded  them 
into  a  body  that  the  most  cunning  executive  could  neither 
cajole  nor  intimidate.  Unmindful  of  the  anger  of  Governors, 
the  rebukes  of  Kings,  of  personal  loss,  even  of  imprisonment, 
they  had  upheld  the  people's  rights.  And  their  descendants 
were  to  reap  the  reward  of  their  faithfulness.  The  traditions 
of  ability,  probity  and  heroism  established  by  the  men  of  the 
Critical  Period  made  possible  that  long  and  honorable  career 
of  the  House  of  Burgesses  and  the  important  role  it  was  to 
play  in  winning  independence  for  America. 


INDEX 


Abigail,  brings  contagion,  46. 

Accomac,  see  also  Eastern  Shore,  80; 
Berkeley  flees  to,  171 ;  expedition 
against,  176,  177;  182;  184;  186; 

195;  197- 

Adam  and  Eve,  ship,  captures  Bacon, 
163;  177;  203. 

Adams,  Peter,  excepted  from  pardon, 
202. 

Admirall,  ship,  128,  129. 

Allen,  Arthur,  251,  253. 

AUerton,  Isaac,  229;  corrupt  bargain 
of,  230. 

Anderson,  William,  257. 

Annelectons,  aid  in  Susquehannock 
defeat,  160. 

Apachisco,  negotiates  peace,  26. 

Appomatocks,  expedition  against,  52. 

Appomattox,   river,  21. 

Archer,  Gabriel,  admitted  to  Council, 
tries  to  establish  a  parliament,  6; 
8;  helps  depose  Smith,  10. 

Argoll,  Samuel,  19;  enforces  laws,  23; 
captures  Pocahontas,  25. 

Arlington,  Earl  of,  grant  to  of  Vir- 
ginia, 123,  124;  yields  his  rights, 
125;  145;  245. 

Arnold,  Anthony,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 202;  hanged,  204. 

Assembly,  General,  attempt  to  estab- 
lish, 6;  early  desire  for,  8;  de- 
scribes tyranny  of  Governors,  24; 
established,  1619,  36;  convenes, 
37 ;  legislative  powers  of,  38 ;  con- 
trol over  taxation,  39;  judicial 
functions  of,  40;  Council  the  up- 
per house  of,  41;  42;  describes 
Indian  war,  51 ;  supports  Com- 
pany, 60 ;  61 ;  sa-.  ed,  62 ;  restored, 
63;  64;  Harvey  usurps  powers  of, 
72;  73;  refuses  tobacco  contract, 
74;  76;  Council  summons,  1636, 
77 ;  elects  West  Governor,  78 ;  79 ; 
86;  opposes  revival  of  Company, 
88;  91;  persecutes  Puritans,  92; 
acknowledges  Charles  II,  95 ;  de- 
fies Parliament,  98;  surrenders, 
100;  102;  Northampton  petitions, 


104;  ids;  106;  107;  108;  contest 
in,  109;  elects  Berkeley  Governor, 
110;  Berkeley  addresses,  11 1; 
112;  115;  encourages  manufac- 
ture, 119;  122;  protests  to  King, 
124;  125;  133;  134;  Long  As- 
sembly, 13s;  136;  137;  138;  140; 
143;  erects  forts,  151,  152;  hatred 
of,  153;  Berkeley  dissolves,  1676, 
158,  159;  Bacon  elected  to,  162; 
163 ;  Bacon  threatens,  168 ;  liberal 
laws  of,  169,  170;  Bacon  sum- 
mons, 173;  interrupted,  178;  204; 
supports  Berkeley,  206,  207;  pro- 
test of,  1677,  214;  session  of  Oc- 
tober, 1677,  218,  219;  session  of 
1679,  222;  rights  of  attacked,  226; 
session  of  1682,  233;  appeals  to 
forbidden,  241,  242;  petition  of 
242,  243 ;  quarrels  with  Effingham 
over,  taxation,  244,  245,  quit-rents, 
245,  246,  veto  power,  246,  247,  248, 
249,  the  clerk,  249,  250. 
Austin,  Black,  executed,  238. 

Bacon,  Nathaniel,  the  rebel,  123 ;  ac- 
cuses Burgesses,  133,  134;  de- 
scribes abuses  of  the  rich,  135 ; 
Berkeley  jealous  of,  144;  145; 
character  of,  154;  becomes  leader 
of  rebels,  155 ;  prepares  to  attack 
Indians,  156;  attacks  Indians,  157; 
proclaimed  a  rebel,  158;  pursues 
Susquehannocks,  159;  visits  Oc- 
caneeches,  160;  battle  with  Oc- 
caneechees,  161,  162;  elected 
Burgess,  162 ;  captured,  163 ;  par- 
doned, 164;  flees  from  James- 
town, 165  ;  seizes  Jamestown,  166 ; 
demands  commission,  167 ;  new 
demands  of,  168;  secures  liberal 
laws,  169,  170;  prepares  new  In- 
dian expedition,  171;  marches 
against  Berkeley,  171 ;  resolves  to 
defy  King,  172;  forces  oaths  on 
prominent  men,  173;  attacks 
Pamunkeys,  174,  175 ;  marches  on 
Jamestown,     178,     179;     repulses 


261 


262 


INDEX 


Berkeley's  attack,  i8o;  enters 
Jamestown,  i8i ;  burns  James- 
town, 182;  binds  Gloucestermen, 
183,  184;  death  of  in  October, 
1676,  184;  186;  187;  executive 
ability  of,  190;  195;  196;  202; 
222. 

Bacon,  Colonel  Nathaniel,  108;  cou- 
sin of  the  Rebel,  154;  rebels  at 
house  of,  185;  189. 

Bacon's  Rebellion,  see  Bacon,  114; 
121 ;  interrupts  Virginia  charter, 
126;  127;  135;  136;  139;  144; 
outbreak  of,  155;  events  of  155 
to  194;  collapses,  190;  anarchy 
of,  191 ;  results  of,  223. 

Bahama,  Gulf  of,  fleet  wrecked  in,  9. 

Ballard,  Thomas,  takes  Bacon's 
oaths,  173;  excluded  from  Coun- 
cil, 216;  229;  252. 

Baltimore,  Lord,  (Cecilius  Calvert) 
sends  colonists  to  Maryland,  70; 
71;  72;  118;  prohibits  cessation 
in  Maryland,  122;  123;  238. 

Baltimore,  Lord,  (George  Calvert) 
colony  of  in  Newfoundland,  68; 
secures  Maryland  patent,  death 
of,  69. 

Barrow,  James,  injustice  to,  198. 

Beale,  Thomas,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 203. 

Bennett,  Richard,  invites  Puritan 
preachers,  92 ;  Governor,  103  ;  ap- 
peases Northampton,  105 ;  Bur- 
gesses rebuke,  106. 

Berkeley,  Lord  John,  131;  201;  213; 
attacks  King's  commissioners, 
21S. 

Berkeley,  Sir  William,  12 ;  Governor, 
84;  character  of,  85;  just  rule  of, 
86;  equalizes  taxes,  87;  opposes 
Company,  88 ;  conquers  Indians, 
90 ;  loyalty  of  to  King,  91 ;  per- 
secutes Puritans,  92 ;  fears  assas- 
sination, 94;  speech  of  defying 
Parliament,  96,  97,  98;  expedi- 
tion against,  99;  surrenders,  100; 
terms  with  Parliament,  loi ;  103 ; 
elected  Governor,  1660,  iio; 
speech  of,  iii ;  accepts  office,  112; 
letter  of  to  Charles  II,  113;  114; 
becomes  changed,  115;  opposes 
Navigation  Acts,  120;  efforts  for 
cessation,  122;  Baltimore  angers, 
123;  fears  mutiny,  126,  127;  pre- 
pares to  attack  Dutch,  1667,  12^ 


129;  complains  of  freight  rates, 
131;  controls  elections,  133;  cor- 
rupts Burgesses,  134;  retains 
Long  Assembly,  135,  136;  con- 
trols local  government,  137,  138, 
139;  evidence  against  partizan, 
143 ;  views  upon  government, 
144,  145 ;  sells  arms  to  Indians, 
147;  recalls  army,  151;  wants  de- 
fensive war,  152;  quarrels  with 
Bacon,  154;  refuses  Bacon  a  com- 
mission, 156;  pursues  Bacon,  157; 
proclaims  Bacon  a  rebel,  158; 
dissolves  Long  Assembly,  158, 
159;  captures  Bacon,  163;  par- 
dons Bacon,  164;  Bacon  es- 
capes from,  165;  Bacon  seizes, 
166;  grants  commission,  167; 
yields  to  Bacon,  168;  tries  to 
raise  forces,  170;  flees  to  Ac- 
comac,  171;  rebels  attack,  174; 
captures  rebel  fleet,  176,  177; 
captures  Jamestown,  178;  Bacon 
marches  on,  179;  repulsed,  180; 
flees,  181 ;  sails  for  Accomac,  182 ; 
controls  navy,  185 ;  raids  of  on 
Western  Shore,  186;  expedition 
of  to  York  River,  187,  188,  189, 
190;  offers  Ingram  pardon,  191; 
rebels  surrender  to,  191,  192; 
Charles  II  blames,  195 ;  recalled, 
196;  illegal  seizures  of,  197,  198; 
angry  at  commissioners,  199,  200; 
refuses  to  leave,  201 ;  proclama- 
tion of,  202,  203 ;  continues  ex- 
ecutions, 203,  204;  controls  As- 
sembly, 205,  206;  dread  of,  207; 
Jeffreys'  proclamation  angers, 
209,  210;  death  of,  211;  com- 
pared with  Effingham,  252. 

Berkeley,  Lady,  letter  of  to  Moryson, 
204;  208;  210;  220. 

Bermuda  Hundred,  Dale  founds,  21 ; 
116. 

Bermudas,  Sea  Adventure  wrecked 
in,    9. 

Berry,  John,  King's  commissioner, 
196;  arrives,  199;  200;  insulted, 
208;  returns  to  England,  215;  in- 
fluence of,  215,  216,  217. 

Beverley,  Robert,  captures  Hansford. 
156;  invades  Gloucester,  187, 
188;  journals  taken  from,  213, 
214;  dismissed  from  office,  216; 
217;  220;  continued  as  Clerk  of 
Assembly,    221 ;    prosecution    of. 


INDEX 


263 


235,    236,    237;    alters    bill,    248; 
Effingham    censures,    249;    252; 

253- 

Black  George,  Harveys  sails  in,  79. 

Bland,  Gyles,  complains  of  poll  tax, 
139;  leads  rebel  fleet,  174;  176; 
captured,  177;  183;  excepted 
from  pardon,  202;  executed,  203. 

Bland,  John,  attacks  Navigation  Acts, 
119. 

Blayton,  Thomas,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 202. 

Bowler,  Thomas,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 203. 

Bray,  Colonel,  excluded  from  Coun- 
cil, 216;  220. 

Brent,  Gyles,  pursues  Indians,  146, 
147;  149;  joins  Pamunkey  expe- 
dition, 174;  marches  against 
Bacon,  182;  his  forces  flee,  183. 

Brick  House,  rebel  forces  at,  193. 

Bristol,  conferences  on  board  of,  200. 

Bristow,  Major,  188,  189. 

Buck,  Rev.,  preaches  at  Jamestown, 
17;  prayer  of,  37. 

Burgesses,  in  first  Assembly,  36;  how 
distributed  in  1619,  37;  39;  40; 
41 ;  coerced  by  Governor,  42 ; 
sympathize  with  Company,  60; 
defy  Charles  I,  63;  64;  74;  ex- 
empted from  arrest.  87 ;  100 ;  su- 
preame  power  in  Virginia.  1652, 
102;  103;  104;  105;  contest 
with  Council,  106;  dismiss  Gov- 
ernor, 107;  108;  109;  reassert 
power,  1660,  no;  114;  Berkeley 
controls  elections  of,  I33  J 
Berkeley  corrupts,  134,  135; 
136;  137;  14s;  Bacon  elected 
to,  162;  Bacon  threatens,  168; 
frauds  in  elections  of,  205,  206; 
records  of  seized,  213,  214;  pro- 
test of,  214;  electoral  frauds, 
218 ;  elections  of  in  1679,  222 ; 
become  more  representative  of 
the  people,  224;  oppose  revenue 
bill,  229,  230,  231;  struggle  of 
with  Effingham  over,  taxation, 
244,  245 ;  quit-rents,  245,  246 ; 
veto  power,  246  to  249,  clerk, 
249,  250. 

Butler,  Nathaniel,  describes  mortality 
in  Virginia,  12;  attacks  London 
Company,  56. 

Byrd,  William,  229. 


Calvert,  Cecilius,  see  Lord  Baltimore. 

Calvert,  George,  see  Lord  Baltimore. 

Calvert,  Leonard,  Governor  of  Mary- 
land, 70;  war  with  Claiborne,  71. 

Carter,  John,  229. 

Carver,  William,  commands  rebel 
fleet,  174;  visits  Berkeley,  176; 
captured  and  hanged,  177;  183; 
222. 

Causie,  beats  off  Indians,  49. 

Cessation,  of  tobacco  planting,  at- 
tempts to  secure,  121,  122,  123; 
asked,  1682,  232;  Burgesses  eager 
for,  233;  238;  239. 

Chanco,  reveals  Indian  plot,  48. 

Charles  I,  42;  his  plans  for  Virginia, 
62 ;  calls  Assembly,  1627,  63 ;  65 ; 
66;  grants  Maryland  charter,  69, 
70;  asks  tobacco  contract,  74;  an- 
gered at  Virginians,  78;  restores 
Harvey,  79;  80;  forgets  Harvey 
case,  82 ;  85 ;  Virginians'  loyalty 
pleases,  88;  90;  94;  executed,  95; 
97;  102;  III. 

Charles  II,  40;  85;  proclaimed  King, 
1649,  89;  Virginians  cling  to,  98; 
loi ;  no;  reappoints  Berkeley, 
113;  oppresses  Virginia,  115;  ap- 
proves Navigation  Acts,  117; 
119;  120;  forbids  cessation,  121; 
blind  to  disaffection  in  Virginia, 
123 ;  makes  Arlington-Culpeper 
grant,  124;  grants  new  Virginia 
patent,  126;  140;  Bacon's  Rebel- 
lion alarms,  195 ;  sends  commis- 
sion to  Virginia.  196;  199;  200; 
anger  of  at  Berkeley,  210;  211; 
angry  at  Assembly,  214,  215; 
224;    225;    226;    227;    death    of, 

243. 

Charles  City,  county,  complains  of 
Berkeley,  136;  charges  of  cor- 
ruption in,  138 ;  142 ;  petition 
from,  153 ;  people  of  take  arms, 
154;  electoral  frauds  in,  205;  216. 

Charters : — the  royal  charter  of  1606, 
2;  31;  provisions  of,  34;  ='7'  the 
royal  charter  of  1609,  Sandys 
draws  up,  8:  Governors  disre- 
gard, 24;  31 ;  gives  Company  con- 
trol of  colony,  35 :  the  popular 
charter  of  1612,  35;  54;  James  I 
attacks,  56,  57:  revoked,  59,  60: 
the  proposed  charter  of  1621,  54: 
Maryland  charter,  Baltimore  se- 


264 


INDEX 


cures,  69:  new  Virginia  charter, 
124,  125. 

Cheesman,  Major,  captured,  186; 
death  of,  187, 

Chesapeake  Bay,  first  fleet  enters,  i ; 
3;  Capt.  Smith  explores,  7;  70; 
naval  war  in,  71 ;  Dutch  fleet  en- 
ters, 1667,  128;  battle  with  Dutch 
in,   1672,   129,   130;   146;   171. 

Chicheley,  Sir  Henry,  commands  In- 
dian forces,  1676,  151 ;  acting 
Governor,  1678,  221 ;  holds  fair 
election,  222;  230;  defies  Bur- 
gesses, 233,  234;  235;  236;  237; 
238. 

Chickahominies,  peace  with,  26;  ex- 
pedition against,  52. 

Chiles,  Colonel,  ic6. 

Claiborne,  William,  in  England,  69 ; 
makes  war  on  Maryland,  71 ;  107. 

Clovell,  killed  by  Indians,  14. 

Cockatrice,  Marylanders  capture,  71. 

Commissions  : — commission  to  inves- 
tigate Company,  56 ;  unfavorable 
report,  57 :  commission  in  Vir- 
ginia, 1624,  60;  61;  64:  Mande- 
ville  commission,  for  Virginia 
affairs,  61;  abolished,  62:  Parlia- 
mentary commission,  to  reduce 
Virginia,  99;  secures  surrender, 
100;  grants  favorable  terms,  loi ; 
establishes  new  government,  102; 
taxes  Northampton,  104;  105: 
King's  commission  of  1676-1677, 
to  receive  Virginia  grievances, 
121,  122;  127;  thinks  poll  tax  un- 
just, 139;  142;  hostile  to  Berke- 
ley, 143;  144;  177;  184;  appoint- 
ment of,  196;  Berkeley  angry  at, 
199,  200;  conference  of  with 
Berkeley,  200,  201 ;  wants  King's 
pardon  published,  202;  Assembly 
snubs,  206;  leads  opposition 
party,  207;  insulted,  208;  reports 
Berkeley's  disobedience,  210;  re- 
ceives grievances,  212,  213 ; 
seizes  journals,  213,  214;  report 
of,  215:  Virginia  commission  to 
Maryland,  to  secure  cessation, 
122. 

Commonwealth  of  England,  85;  86; 
defied  by  Berkeley,  96;  sends 
expedition  to  Virginia,  99;  Vir- 
ginia surrenders  to,  100;  103. 


Commonwealth  Period,  42 ;  govern- 
ment of  Virginia  during,  L02; 
no;  ended,  114;  115;  116. 

Commons  of  Virginia,  see  Middle 
Class. 

Conway,  Captain,  Dutch  take  shallop 
of,  127,  128. 

Council,  resident  in  England,  King 
appoints,  2;  warning  of,  10;  de- 
termination of,  31 ;  34. 

Council  of  State,  of  Commonwealth, 
95 ;  warns  Berkeley,  96 ;  sends 
expedition  to  Virginia,  99;  100; 
102;  103;  letter  from,  108. 

Council  of  Virginia;  1606-1610,  great 
powers  of,  2 ;  selections  for,  3 ; 
discord  in,  3,  4;  disruption  of,  4; 
deposes  Wingfield,  4,  5;  tyranny 
of,  5 ;  reduced  to  two,  7 ;  abol- 
ished, 8;  acts  to  depose  Smith, 
10;  34;  1610-1619,  an  advisory 
body,  17;  1619-1689,  part  of  As- 
sembly, 36 ;  37 ;  39 ;  powers  of,  41 ; 
Indians  kill  six  of,  50;  sympa- 
thizes with  Company,  60;  pun- 
ishes Sharpless,  61;  62;  63;  64; 
Harvey  wishes  to  restrain,  65 ; 
quarrels  with  Harvey,  67,  68; 
gets  rid  of  Baltimore,  69;  70; 
hostile  to  Maryland,  71 ;  72; 
threatens  Harvey,  73;  74;  75;  ar- 
rests Harvey,  76;  expels  Harvey, 
77;  revised,  80;  86;  87;  93;  100; 
agreement  of  with  Common- 
wealth, loi ;  elected  by  Burgesses, 
1652,  102 ;  105 ;  contest  with  Bur- 
gesses, 106;  Burgesses  dismiss, 
107 ;  seeks  lost  power,  108 ;  as- 
sumes authority,  109;  129;  sub- 
mission of  to  Berkeley,  133;  137; 
praises  Berkeley,  143,  144;  Ba- 
con appointed  to,  164;  Bacon 
coerces,  168;  169;  200;  201;  217; 
220;  228;  229;  prosecutes  Bever- 
ley, 235,  236,  237 ;  quarrel  of  over 
Bill  of  Ports,  247,  248,  249. 

Courts,  Council  sits  as  a  court,  34; 
35 ;  Assembly  acts  as  a  court, 
40;  41;  Governor's  misuse 
of,  66;  78;  79;  Harvey  master 
of,  80;  81;  Berkeley  does  not 
abuse,  86;  133;  local  courts,  137; 
Berkeley  controls,  138;  judicial 
functions  of  Assembly  abolished, 
241,  242. 


INDEX 


265 


Coventry,  Secretary,  207;  letter  of  to 
Berkeley,  210,  211;  protects 
King's  commissioners,  215;  221; 
225. 

Crimson,  Abraham,  captures  tobacco 
fleet,  127,  128,  129. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  102;  neglects  Vir- 
ginia, 103;  107;  death  of,  108. 

Cromwell,  Richard,  Lord  Protector, 
108;   resigns,   109. 

Culpeper,  Thomas  Lord,  grant  to  of 
Virginia,  123,  124;  yields  his 
rights,  125;  14s;  Governor,  1677, 
212;  219;  220;  222;  instructions 
to,  226,  227;  arrives  in  Virginia, 
228;  insists  on  revenue  bill,  229, 
230,  231 ;  warned,  232 ;  hastens  to 
Virginia,  237;  prosecutes  plant- 
cutters,  237,  238;  deposed,  239; 
character  of,  239,  240;  241;  244; 

245 ;  247. 

Curls  of  the  River,  24. 

Dale,  Sir  Thomas,  Deputy-Governor, 
161 1,  19;  founds  Henrico,  19,  21; 
secures  corn  ciop,  22;  educates 
Pocahontas,  25 ;  returns  to  Eng- 
land. 27;  35;  36. 

Davies,  Somerset,  238. 

Da  la  Warr,  Thomas  Lord,  first  Gov- 
ernor, 8;  11;  prevents  desertion 
of  Virginia,  16;  assumes  govern- 
ment, 17;  restores  prosperity,  17, 
18;  becomes  ill,  18,  19;  22;  23; 
brings  new  constitution,  dies  at 
sea,  1618,  35 ;  64. 

Denis,  Robert,  commands  fleet  to 
Virginia,  99. 

Devil's  Island,  colonists  wrecked  on, 
10;  16;  22. 

DeVries,  describes  sickness,  12. 

Digges,  Edward,  Governor,  106. 

Discovery,  sails  for  Virginia,  i,  11. 

Doeg,  Indians,  146,  147. 

Drew,  Colonel,  rebel  leader,  185. 

Drummond,  William,  Bacon  visits, 
163 ;  Berkeley  excepts  from  par- 
don, 178;  182;  190;  captured,  193; 
executed,   194. 

Duke  of  York,  ship,  236. 

Dutch,  85 ;  take  Virginia  tobacco,  96, 
98;  100;  on  the  Eastern  Shore, 
104;  105;  114;  115;  contest  car- 
rying trade,  116;  cut  off  from 
tobacco  trade,  117;  118;  iig;  cap- 
ture tobacco  fleet,  1667,  127,  128, 


129;   battle   with   in    Chesapeake 
Bay,    1672,    129,    130;    131;    132; 

142;  145;  172. 

Dysentery,  epidemic  of  in  Virginia, 
11;  15;  De  la  Warr  suffers  from 
19;  Bacon  dies  of,  184. 

Earleton,  Stephen,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 202. 

Eastern  Shore,  see  also  Accomac,  ill 
affected,  103;  grievances  of,  104; 
disorders  of  suppressed,  105 ; 
Berkeley  flees  to,  171 ;  expedition 
against,  174,  176,  177;  Berkeley 
returns  to,  182;  184;  l86;  197; 
236. 

Effingham,  Lord  Howard,  Governor, 
239;  character  of,  240;  forbids 
appeals  to  Assembly,  241,  242; 
proclaims  James  II,  243 ;  quar- 
rels with  Burgesses  over,  taxa- 
tion, 244,  245,  quit-rents,  245, 
246,  veto  power,  246,  247,  248, 
249,  their  clerk,  249,  250;  op- 
pressions of,  251,  252;  quarrels 
with  Ludwell,  253,  254;  Burgess- 
es complain  of,  254,  255  ;  prevents 
riots,  256;  257;  overthrow  of, 
258. 

Elisabeth,  frigate,  captured  by  Dutch, 
127,   128,   129. 

Elizabeth,  river,  merchantmen  es- 
cape into,  1667,  128. 

Elizabeth  City,  66;  67;  temporary 
capital,  80. 

English  Church,  desire  to  extend,  31 ; 
to  convert  Indians,  44;  48;  large 
planters  adhere  to,  91. 

English  Revolution,  40 ;  42 ;  a  victory 
for  Virginia,  256,  257. 

Epidemics,  see  Sickness. 

Fairfax,  Thomas,  196. 

Famines,  frequent,  2;  Indians  and 
epidemics  cause,  14;  misery  of 
described,  15  ;  eliminated  on  upper 
James,  23;  English  bring  on  In- 
dians, 51,  52. 

Farrar,  William,  y6. 

Farrar's  Island,  see  Henrico. 

Farrill,  Hubert,  Bacon  entrusted  to, 
163;  attacks  Bacon's  House,  189; 
killed,  190. 

Fees,  limited,  87. 

First  Supply,  Newport  brings,  6. 

Fitzhugh,  William,  229. 


266 


INDEX 


Gardner,  Captain,  fights  Dutch,  130; 
captures  Bacon,   163. 

Gates,  Sir  Thomas,  first  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  8;  wrecked  in  Ber- 
mudas, 9;  10;  ends  first  royal 
government,  10;  to  abandon  Vir- 
ginia, 16;  returns.  Councillor,  17; 
19 ;  again  in  Virginia,  21 ;  posts 
laws,   1610,  22 ;  27 ;  35. 

George,  takes  tobacco  to  England,  28. 

Gloucester,  county,  Berkeley  active 
in,  170;  171;  Bacon  in,  182;  Ba- 
con coerces,  183,  184;  Bacon  dies 
in,  184;  185;  military  movements 
in,  187,  188,  189;  190;  207;  plant- 
cutting  in,  234,  235 ;  237 ;  238. 

Goodrich,  Thomas,  excepted  from 
pardon,  202. 

Goodspeed,  sails  for  Virginia,  i;  11. 

Gosnold,  Bartholomew,  made  Coun- 
cillor, 3 ;  death  of,  4. 

Grantham,  Captain,  envoy  to  Ingram, 
191 ;  secures  surrender  of  rebels, 
192. 

Green  Spring,  159;  182;  rebels  at, 
185;  200;  Assembly  at,  205;  2C^; 
213;  218. 

Green  Spring  faction,  217;  controls 
elections,  218;  219;  activity  of, 
220;  Culpeper  supports,  228; 
pleads  for  Ludwell,  229 ;  253. 

Grindon,  Sara,  excepted  from  pardon, 
203. 

Hamor,  Ralph,  26;  49. 

Hamor,  Thomas,  49. 

Hansford,  Colonel,  rebel  leader,  185; 
captured  and  hanged,  186. 

Harrison,  Benjamin,  229. 

Harrison,  Thomas,  becomes  a  Puri- 
tan, 92;  expelled  from  his  parish, 
93;  95;  96. 

Harvey,  John,  describes  Indian  war, 
52,  commissioner  to  Virginia,  60; 
Governor,  64 ;  attacks  Pott,  65 ; 
66;  quarrels  with  Council,  6y ; 
wants  greater  power,  68;  aids 
Marylanders,  70;  arbitrary  rule 
of,  72 ;  y2\  seizes  a  servant,  72 \ 
detains  letter  to  King,  74;  ar- 
rests rioters,  75 ;  Council  arrests, 
76 ;  expelled  from  Virginia,  77 ; 
in  England,  78;  reinstated,  79; 
tyranny  of,  80;  seizes  Matthews' 
estate,  81 ;   attacked  in   England, 


82;  removed,  83;  prosecuted,  84; 
85;  86. 

Harwood,  Thomas,  envoy  to  Eng- 
land, 1636,  78;  79. 

Henrico,  county.  Bacon  resides  in, 
154;  Berkeley  in,  159;  Bacon 
Burgess  from,  162;  Bacon  flees 
to,  165;  174,  178. 

Henrico,  plantation,  Dale  founds,  19, 
21 ;  22;  24;  43;  college  of,  44. 

Hill,  Edward,  deprived  of  office,  216; 
220. 

Holden,  Robert,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 202. 

Holland,   see   Dutch. 

Hopton,  Lord,  124. 

Indians,  a  menace,  2;  attack  James- 
town, 13;  destroy  corn,  14;  15; 
16;  war  with  continues,  18;  Dale 
seeks  stronghold  against,  19; 
driven  from  Bermuda  Hundred, 
21;  peace  with,  25;  26;  27;  de- 
stroy iron  works,  43 ;  college  for, 
44;  friendship  of,  47;  plan  mas- 
sacre, 48;  massacre  of  1622,  49; 
50;  war  with,  50  to  54;  56;  long 
peace  with,  88;  massacre  of  1644, 
89 ;  make  peace,  90 ;  91 ;  con- 
spiracy of  rumored,  104;  122; 
raid  of,  1675,  146;  war  with,  147, 
149,  150,  152;  kill  Bacon's  over- 
seer, 15s ;  Bacon  prepares  to  at- 
tack, 156;  war  with,  157  to  162; 
167;  again  on  war  path,  170, 
Bacon  again  attacks,  175  to  176; 
178. 

Ingram,  General,  election  of,  184; 
disposes  rebel  forces,  185;  cap- 
tures Pate's  House,  188;  rebel 
army  surrenders  to,  189;  his  lack 
of  executive  ability,  190;  his  sur- 
render, 191;  193;  206. 

Isle  of  Wight,  county,  136;  com- 
plaints from,  138;  140;  143;  sub- 
dued, 190;  207. 

Isles,  John,  executed,  203. 

James,  ship,  231. 

James  I,  2 ;  6 ;  grants  charter  of 
1609;  8;  wants  American  empire, 
29;  interest  in  Virginia,  30;  op- 
poses liberal  government,  32; 
grants  charters,  34;  restricts  to- 
bacco, 45;  angry  at  Company,  54; 
ultimatum,  55 ;  investigates  Com- 


INDEX 


a67 


pany,  56;  offers  new  compromise, 
57,  58;  overthrows  Company,  59; 
death  of,  61;  64;  65. 

James  II,  40;  42;  224;  accession  of, 
243;  244;  246;  rebukes  Assembly, 
249;  deposed,  255;  256. 

James  City,  county,  107;  complains  of 
forts,   142;  218;  254. 

James,  river,  first  fleet  enters,  i ;  7 ; 
21;  43;  47;  79;  85;  89;  90;  98; 
99;  100;  120;  battle  with  Dutch 
in,  127,  128,  129;  130;  forts  on, 
141;  142;  153;  Berkeley  at  falls 
of,  157;  Bacon  descends,  163; 
171;  174;  Berkeley  in,  181,  182; 
185;  rebels  defeated  on,  190;  199; 
English  fleet  in,  200. 

James,  Thomas,  preaches  in  Virginia, 
92. 

Jamestown,  founded,  i ;  fleet  arrives 
at  1909,  9;  10;  site  objected  to, 
11;  Indians  attack,  13;  14;  Gates 
finds  ruined,  16;  18;  Dale 
reaches,  19;  21;  22;  tobacco  in 
streets  of,  24;  25;  ai ;  first  As- 
sembly at,  2,1',  48;  S3;  (>},',  Balti- 
more visits,  69;  "]"] ;  80;  90;  de- 
fended by  Berkeley,  100;  104; 
no;  122;  130;  houses  built  at, 
140;  fort  at,  141;  Bacon  visits, 
163;  164;  Bacon  flees  from,  165; 
Bacon  seizes,  166 ;  Bacon  at,  167, 
168;  177;  Berkeley  captures,  178; 
Bacon  besieges,  179,  180;  Bacon 
captures,  181 ;  Bacon  burns,  182 ; 
233;  238. 

Japazaws,  Indian  king,  25. 

Jeffreys,  Herbert,  137;  144;  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor, 196;  leaves  for 
Virginia,  197 ;  199 ;  arrives,  200 ; 
yields  to  Berkeley,  201 ;  207 ;  in- 
sulted, 208;  proclamation  of,  209; 
210;  21  r;  214;  opposition  to,  216; 
illness  of,  217,  218;  prosecutes 
Ludwell,  219;  again  ill,  220; 
death  of,  221 ;  223 ;  229. 

Jenkins,  Sir  Lionel,  225 ;  238 ;  243. 

Jennings,  John,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 202. 

Jones,  William,  approves  new  Vir- 
ginia charter,  126. 

Jones,  Robert,  excepted  from  pardon, 
202 ;  Moryson  pleads  for,  203 ; 
pardoned,  204. 

Judiciary,  see  Courts. 


Kecoughtan,  90. 

Kemp,  Matthew,  229;  234;  235. 

Kemp,  Richard,  given  inadvertently 
as  Matthew  Kemp  on  page  22, 
pillages  Matthews'  estate,  81 ; 
quarrel  of  with  Panton,  82 ;  83 ; 
prosecuted,  84. 

Kendall,  George,  Councillor,  3;  ex- 
pelled from  Council,  4;  tried  for 
mutiny,  shot,  5. 

Kent  Island,  Claiborne  settles,  71 ; 
72;  72. 

Knight,   John,    145. 

Knowles,  John,  Puritan  minister,  92. 

Larrimore,  Captain,  Bacon  seizes 
ship  of,  174;  plots  to  aid  Berke- 
ley, 176 ;  aids  in  capture  of  rebels, 
177;  211. 

Law,  2^;  the  Divine,  Moral  and  Mar- 
tial laws,  23;  cruelty  of,  23,  24; 
38;  against  seizing  servants,  7Z', 
against  Puritans,  92;  laws  to  en- 
courage manufacture,  119;  140; 
Bacon's  Laws,  169,  170;  laws  of 
1679,  222;  Culpeper  passes  three 
laws,  229,  230,  231. 

Lawrence,  Henry,  letter  of  to  Vir- 
ginia,  108;   109. 

Lawrence,  Richard,  Bacon  visits,  163 ; 
flees  from  Jamestown,  178;  182; 
disposes  of  Bacon's  body,  184; 
190;  192;  flight  of,  193,  194;  ex- 
cepted from  pardon,  202;  feared, 
205. 

Lightfoot,  Philip,  takes  Bacon's 
oaths,  173. 

London  Company,  2 ;  3 ;  6 ;  7 ;  secures 
charter  of  1609,  8;  15;  17;  sends 
Dale,  19;  22;  24;  takes  tobacco, 
28;  29;  aids  Pilgrims,  30;  mo- 
tives of,  31 ;  England  supports, 
32;  liberalism  in,  Z'^;  35;  36;  38; 
42 ;  sends  more  settlers,  43 ;  to- 
bacco restrictions  injure,  45;  46; 
massacre  of  1622  discourages,  50; 
King  hostile  to,  54 ;  55 ;  investi- 
gated, 56;  57;  rejects  King's 
compromise,  58;  charters  of  re- 
voked, 59;  60;  62;  plan  to  re- 
vive, 83  :  87 ;  120 ;  124. 

Lower  Norfolk,  county,  121 ;  taxa- 
tion in,  138. 

Loyd,  Edward,  imprisoned  by  Berke- 
ley,  198. 

Ludwell,  Philip,  captures  rebel  fleet, 


268 


INDEX 


177;  189  J  excluded  from  Council, 
216;  217;  Jeffreys  prosecutes, 
219;  convicted,  220;  restored  to 
Council,  229;  quarrels  with  Ef- 
fingham, 253 ;  success  of  in  Eng- 
land, 257,  258. 

Ludwell,  Thomas,  86;  131;  132;  136; 
141 ;  220. 

Lynhaven  Bay,  129. 

Magna  Charta,  of  Virginia,  Yeardley 
brings,  35;  government  estab- 
lished under,  36;  38;  61;  64. 

Malaria,  epidemic  of  in  Virginia,  11; 

15. 

Mannakins,  160. 

Martin,  John,  Councillor,  3;  helps 
depose  Wingfield,  4,  5;  6;  10; 
his  Burgesses  not  admitted,  38. 

Martin's  Hundred,  37;  38. 

Mary,  Queen,  256. 

Maryland,  68;  69;  founded,  70;  war 
of  with  Claiborne,  71;  72;  77; 
79;  116;  agrees  to  cessation,  122; 
123;  127;  fleet  of  saved,  130; 
146;  147;  Indian  war  in,  149,  150; 
238. 

Mason,  Colonel,  146;  147;  149. 

Massacres :  of  1622,  47 ;  48 ;  details 
of,  49,  so;  88;  89;  of  1644,  89; 
details  of,  89;  92;   147. 

Mathews,  Thomas,  202. 

Matthews,  Samuel,  commissioner, 
1624,  60;  Harvey  favors,  65; 
leads  Council,  68;  complains  of 
Maryland,  72 ;  threatens  Harvey, 
73 ;  74 ;  arrests  Harvey,  76  ;  helps 
expel  Harvey,  77;  accused  of 
treason,  79;  expelled  from  Coun- 
cil, 80;  estate  of  seized,  81;  82; 
83 ;  restored  to  Council,  86 ; 
Governor,  106;  deposed  but  re- 
elected, 107;  108;  death  of,  109. 

Mattapony,  river,  185. 

Middle  class,  92;  formation  of,  93; 
freedmen  recruit,  94;  102;  131. 

Middlesex,  county,  171;  185;  187; 
rises  for  Berkeley,  188;  190;  235; 
236;  237. 

Milner,  Thomas,  173;  243;  251;  252. 

Minifie,  George,  arrests  Harvey,  76; 
77',  79',  restored  to  Council,  86. 

Molina,  12;  testifies  to  cruelty,  23. 

Monmouth,  Duke  of,  243 ;  244. 

Mortality,   see   sickness. 

Moryson,    Francis,    King's    commis- 


sioner, 196;  199;  200;  intercedes 

for  Jones,  203 ;  204 ;  insulted,  208 ; 

215;  influence  of,  215;  216;  217; 

241. 
Nansemond,    county,    95;    129;    130; 

142;  143;  207. 
Nansemonds,  52;  146. 
Navigation  Acts,  103;   104;   114;  act 

of   1651,   116;   act  of   1660,   117; 

effect  of  on  Virginia,  118;  Berke- 
ley protests  against,   120;  act  of 

1672,  121;  123;  127;  172;  222. 
Necotowance,  90. 
New    Kent,    county,    156;    178;    193; 

235. 
Newport,  Christopher,  i ;  Councillor, 

3;  4;  5;  6;  11;  saves  Smith,  6; 

brings     Second     Supply,     7;     8; 

Vice-Admiral,  8;  9;   11;   17. 
Nicholson,    Francis,    257;    Governor, 

258. 
Northampton,  county,  103 ;  104 ;  105  ; 

236. 
North  Carolina,  efforts  for  cessation 

in,  121 ;  122;  123. 
Northern  Neck,  grant  of,   124;   125; 

126. 
Notley,  Governor  Thomas,  137. 
Nottoways,  146. 

Occaneechees,    159;    160;    defeat    of, 

161,  162;  174. 
Opechancanough,   plans   massacre   of 

1622,  48;   52;   S3;   89;   death  of, 

90;   147- 

Pace,  Richard,  given  by  typographi- 
cal error  as  Race  in  text,  48. 

Page,  Francis,  250. 

Page,  John,  229. 

Pamunkey,  river,  185. 

Pamaunkeys,  victory  over,  1624,  53 ; 
146;  151;  is6;  IS7;  Bacon  de- 
feats, 174,  175;   178. 

Panton,  Anthony,  trial  of,  82;  83; 
84;  85. 

Parke,  Daniel,  218;  219. 

Parliament,  32 ;  33;  34 ;  protects  mer- 
chants, 39 ;  42 ;  S4 ;  Company  ap- 
peals to,  58;  87;  91;  sympathy 
with  in  Virginia,  92,  93,  94 ;  95 ; 
blockades  Virginia,  96;  98;  sends 
fleet  against  Virginia,  99 ;  Vir- 
ginia surrenders  to,  loi ;  passes 
Navigation  Acts,  116;  120;  121. 

Patents,  see  charters. 


INDEX 


269 


Pate's    House,    Bacon    dies    at,    184; 

Ingram  captures,  188. 
Peninsula,    the,    between    the    James 

and  the  York,   185. 
Percy,  George,  President,  10;  tells  of 

sickness,  11;  Councillor,  17;  act- 
ing Governor,  19. 
Persicles,    159;    defeats    Susquehan- 

nocks,   160;   Bacon  defeats,   161; 

death  of,  161. 
Phelps,  John,  202. 
Pierce,  William,  ^T,  79;  80;  82;  86. 
Pierse,  Thomas,  iT' 
Piersey,   Abraham,    commissioner   in 

1624,  60. 
Pilgrims,  see  Puritans. 
Plague,  London,  epidemic  of,  13;  15. 
Plymouth,  78;  118. 
Pocahontas,    captured,    25;     marries 

Rolfe,  26;  47;  88. 
Point  Comfort,  16;  70;  71;  80;  fort 

at  destroyed,  132;  141. 
Pomfoy,  Richard,  executed,  203. 
Population,   1 14. 
Pory,    John,    commissioner    in    1624, 

60;  61. 
Potomac,  river,  25;  69;  71;  120;  124; 

141;    146;    149;    159;    174;    182; 

256. 
Potts,  John,  acting  Governor,  64;  ar- 
rested, 65 ;  convicted,  66 ;  67 ;  69 ; 

76;  ^T,  78;  82. 

Pountis,  John,  represents  Assembly 
in   England,   61. 

Povirell,  William,  52. 

Powhatan,  25;  26;  89;   147. 

President,  duties  of,  2,  3;  4;  5 ;  9;  10. 

Privy  Council,  2;  54;  sends  commis- 
sion to  Virginia,  62 ;  65 ;  68 ;  ac- 
quits Harvey,  79 ;  81 ;  82 ;  re- 
moves Harvey,  83;  84;  214;  215; 
216;  226;  227;  232;  238;  239; 
240;  241;  243;  244;  251;  257. 

Protector,  Lord,  see  Cromwell. 

Purifee,    Capt,    "JT. 

Puritans,  30;  of  Virginia,  92;  hostile 
to  King,  93 ;  95  ;  99 ;  103. 

Quit-rents,  124;  230;  quarrel  over, 
24s,  246. 

Rappahannock,  river,  25;  124;  141; 
151;   179;  182;  185;  256. 

Ratcliffe,  John,  Councillor,  3;  Presi- 
dent, 4;  5;  deposed,  7;  8;  helps 
depose  Smith,  10. 

Read,  James,  5. 


Reade's  House,  rebels  posted  at,  183 ; 
captured,  186. 

Representative  government,  attempt 
to  establish,  6;  James  I  opposes, 
32 ;  desire  for  in  Company,  ZZ  \ 
none  at  first,  34;  decided  upon, 
35;  established,  36;  54;  causes 
James  I  to  attack  Company,  55 ; 
Virginians  plead  for,  60;  Charles 
I  opposes,  (i2;  91 ;  advocates  of 
in  Virginia,  93 ;  under  the  Com- 
monwealth, 102;  people  schooled 
in,  114;  Berkeley  undermines, 
133,  134,  135,  136,  137,  138;  Berke- 
ley does  not  believe  in,  144;  153; 
struggle  for,  223. 

Restoration  Period,  42;  unfortunate 
for  Virginia,  115;  Navigation 
Acts  in,  117;  138;  224;  252. 

Restoration,  of  Stuarts,  no;  accepted 
in  Virginia,  113;  effects  of  on 
Virginia,  115;  117;  135. 

Richahecrians,   156. 

Roanoke,  river,  159;  battle  at,  160, 
161 ;  162 ;  Bacon  plans  to  retreat 
to,  172. 

Rolfe,  John,  25 ;  marries  Pocahontas, 
26;  Tj;  28;  47;  88. 

Saint  Mary's,  founded,  71;  72;  ^y, 
conference  at,  122. 

Sandy  Bay,  166;  Bacon  guards,  167; 
Bacon's  camp  at,  179;  battle  at, 
180;  181;  183. 

Sandys,  Sir  Edwin,  draws  up  charter 
of  1609,  8;  liberal  leader,  2>Z\  345 
designs  liberal  government,  35; 
43;  45;  46;  47;  50;  54;  impris- 
oned, 55;  56;  60;  61;  62, 

Sandys,  George,  44;  46;  52;  tries  to 
revive  Company,  87. 

Sarah  Constant,  sails  for  Virginia,  1 ; 
II. 

Scarburgh,  Charles,  251. 

Scarburgh,  William,  executed,  203. 

Scrivener,   Matthew,   drowned,   7. 

Scurvy,  infects  immigrants,  15;  19. 

Sea  Adventure,  wrecked,  9;  10. 

Sea  Flower,  15. 

"Seasoned",  see  sickness. 

Second  Supply,  Newport  brings,  7. 

Senecas,  146;  160;  256. 

Sharpless,  Edward,  61. 

Sherwood,  William,  136;  forfeits 
Berkeley's  favor,  137;  205;  claims 


270 


INDEX 


frauds  in  elections,  218;  220; 
243;  251. 

Sickness,  2;  disastrous,  10;  in  1607, 
11;  in  1610,  12;  18;  visitors  de- 
scribe, 12;  immigrant  ships 
spread,  13;  18;  19;  reduced, 
21;  renewal  of,  25;  44;  45;  thou- 
sands die  of,  46;  declines,  1624, 
47;  56;  57;  64;  115;  attacks  Jef- 
freys, 217. 

Smith,  Captain  John,  restrained,  3; 
restored  to  Council,  4;  deposes 
Wingfield,  4,  5;  6;  President,  7; 
his  plots,  9;  deposed,  10;  11;  de- 
scribes famine,  14;  15. 

Smith,  Mr.  John,  251. 

Smith,  Lawrence,  in  Gloucester,  188; 
189. 

Smith,  Sir  Thomas,  24;  61. 

Spaniards,  colonists  fear,  i;  5;  22; 
29;  32;  45;  89. 

Spencer,  Nicholas,  228;  235;  247;  250. 

Spotswood,  Alexander,  44. 

Spring,  Robert,  excepted  from  par- 
don, 202. 

Stafford,  county,  Indian  raid  in,  146. 

Stevens,   Capt.,   74. 

Stoakes,  Robert,  executed,  203. 

Strachey,  William,  17. 

Sturdivant,  John,  202. 

Stuyvesant,   Governor,    113. 

Swann,  Thomas,  173;  200;  201;  ex- 
cepted from  pardon,  203 ;  restored 
to  Council,  216. 

Summers,  George,  admiral,  8; 
wrecked,  9;  11. 

Surry,  county,  138;  subdued,   190. 

Susquehannocks,  91 ;  press  south,  146 ; 
war  with,  147 ;  fort  besieged,  149, 
150;  atrocities  of,  150;  I5i  I  IS6; 
158;  Bacon  pursues,  159;  Occa- 
neechees  defeat,  160;  161;  174. 

Tanx-Powhatans,  war  against,  52. 

Tappahatomaks,  52. 

Taxation,  39;  40;  Harvey's  illegal, 
72,  72)',  79 'y  attempt  to  equalize, 
87 ;  91 ;  loi ;  Northampton  com- 
plains of,  104;  105;  115;  120; 
125;  126;  135;  local,  138;  by 
poll,  139;  140;  141;  142;  rebels 
refuse  to  pay,  167 ;  207 ;  227 ;  As- 
sembly's control  of  attacked,  229, 
230,  231;  244;  24s. 

Thompson,  William,  92. 

Thorpe,  Rev.  George,  Indians  kill,  50. 


Tindall's  Point,  rebels  surrender  at, 
192;   executions  at,   193. 

Tobacco,  22;  24;  Rolfe  cures,  27; 
high  price  of,  28;  taxes  paid  in, 
39;  40;  43;  James  I  restricts,  44, 
45;  51;  Charles  I  wishes  to  buy, 
63 ;  70 ;  King  asks  contract  for, 
74;  83;  93;  96;  114;  115;  price  of 
declines,  117,  118;  glut  of,  119; 
attempts  to  restrict  planting  of, 
121,  122,  123;  tobacco  fleet  cap- 
tured, 127,  128,  129;  132;  low 
price  of,  232 ;  cessation  of  asked, 
233;  tobacco  riots,  234  to  238; 
245 ;  ports  for  shipping  of  246, 
247,  248. 

Tottopottomoi,   156. 

Trade  and  Plantations,  Committee  of, 
120;  144;  214;  225;  226;  231; 
232;  243;  257. 

Tucker,  William,  53. 

Turkey  Island,  21. 

Turner,  John,  excepted  from  pardon, 
202. 

Twine,  John,  2i7- 

Unmasking,  the,  attack  on  Company, 

12. 
Utie,  John,  helps  arrest  Harvey,  76; 

79;  sent  to  England,  80;  82. 

Vestries,  cliques  control,  138,  139. 

Wading,  Rev.,  184. 
Waldo,  Richard,  7. 
Walkelett,   General,  leads  expedition 

to  Middlesex,  188;  surrender  of, 

192 ;  193 ;  256. 
Warde,  Captain,  2>7- 
Warrens,  William,  75. 
Warwick,  county,  140. 
Washington,    John,    beseiges    Indian 

fort,   149. 
Weinman,  Ferdinando,  17. 
West,  Francis,  9;   10;  Governor,  64; 

elected   Governor,    1636,    78;    79; 

excluded  from  Council,  80 ;  82. 
West,   John,   excepted   from  pardon, 

202. 
Western  Shore.  174;  177;  183;  187. 
Westminster  Hall,  98;  99. 
West    Point.    Ingram    uses    as    base, 

185;  188;  rebels  surrender,  192. 
Whaly,   Major,   185;   defeats  Farrill, 

i8g,  190;  202. 
Wiccocomico,  conference  at,  122. 


INDEX 


271 


Wilford,    Captain,    captured,    186. 

William,  of  Orange,  256 ;  257. 

Willis,  Francis,  108. 

Windebank,  Secretary,  84. 

Wingfield,  Edward,  President,  3 ;  de- 
posed, 4,  5;  6;  8;  13;  35;  62. 

Winthrop,  Governor,  letter  of  to 
Berkeley,  92. 

Wolstenholme,  Sir  John,  72;  74. 

Woodall,  John,  81. 

Wyatt,  Sir  Francis,  51 ;  defeats  Pa- 
munkeys,  53;  reappointed  Gover- 
nor, 1624,  61 ;  62 ;  saves  Assem- 
bly, 63 ;  64 ;  Governor  again,  83 ; 
attacks  Harvey,  84;  85;  86. 

Wynne,  Peter,  7. 


Wyanokes,  52. 

Yeardley,  George,  acting  Governor, 
27;  Governor,  45;  brings  Magna 
Charta,  36;  meets  Assembly,  37; 
42;  46;  52;  62;  again  Governor, 

64. 

Yellow  fever,  13,  15. 

York,  county,  75;  185;  Farrill  in- 
vades, 189;  191. 

York,  river,  90 ;  91 ;  98 ;  120 ;  128 ; 
141;  174;  182;  184;  185;  186; 
Berkeley's  expedition  to,  187,  188, 
189,  190;  217. 

Young,  Captain,  74. 


\4I.IFOR^'' 


14  DAY  USE 


4» 
•RARY 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 


LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below, 
or  on  the  date  to  which  renewed.  Renewals  only: 

Tel.  No.  642-3405 
Renewals  may  be  made  4  days  priod  to  date  due. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


L 


BECTD  LP  AUG  1  4  72  -6  PM  9  4 


fit,\^.u  UP 


V'^'t 


izn- 


*fi^WW0vS7il 


MUL 


RECEIVED  BY 


' '^  '3?K     JUH  a  i  1985 

Modrm 


DEEt, 


flBieigi^' 


£3  19-7S 


&*; 


7«0B 


LD21A-60w-8,'70 
(N88378l0)476— A-32 


t  Gjpjqral  Library 
i varsity  of  California 
Berkijiey 


^^^ 
^n©*' 


L]>. 


GENERM 


ubraryu-iTberkeuy 


BQQ0B3'B=ia'^ 


yiDidiJ  nioM  ^OS      <#M«Ot 

£|                          2|    f  aol?13SMAOJ 

Rl 

- 

\ 


MM 


,;nii 


I'     1    ! 


mm 


'ill 
'ill' 


I  m 


I'll! 

111! 


I       ,f 


i 


iiiifi 

'ijliiiiiiiiinij.il 


11 

iPi 

1  i 


wkm 


iiiiji 

■  n  i  'M 
I!  III! 


Ililill 


il  lilil 


I'l! 
''I'lliii 


I  L 

i     hi 


i      <!<  I  1  i 
lii      I 


I      i  H  >: 


iil! 


'lilil     I       I 


i'iii 

1,1 1    I 


!!lii!il! 


II 


Inliiiiiil!;;!;! 

iniliii  il!''"" 


mm 


111 

'i  il 


1 


